{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_48967/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_48967","id":"gutenberg_48967","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48967","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: History - Religious","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Jewish mythology","Judaism -- History -- To 70 A.D."],"text":"Transcriber\u2019s Note:\n\nThis version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects.\nItalics are delimited with the \u2018_\u2019 character as _italic_. Bold font is\ndelimited by the \u2018=\u2019 character. The rendering of certain characters in\nclassical languages may not display correctly in your reader.\nSuperscripted characters appear as ^m.\n\nFootnotes, which appeared at the bottom of each page, have been gathered\nat the end of each chapter. They have also been renumbered consecutively\nin order establish the uniqueness required to facilitate searches. Any\nreferences to specific notes in the text have been corrected to follow\nthe new numbering.\n\n\n\n\n MYTHOLOGY AMONG THE HEBREWS\n\n\n LONDON: PRINTED BY\n SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE\n AND PARLIAMENT STREET\n\n\n MYTHOLOGY AMONG THE HEBREWS\n\n AND\n\n ITS HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT\n\n\n BY\n\n IGNAZ GOLDZIHER, PH.D.\n\n MEMBER OF THE HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES\n\n\n\n\n _TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, WITH ADDITIONS BY THE AUTHOR_\n\n BY\n\n RUSSELL MARTINEAU, M.A.\n\n OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM\n\n\n\n\n LONDON\n LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.\n 1877\n\n\n _All rights reserved_\n\n\n\n\n TO\n\n PROFESSORS\n\n H.L. FLEISCHER\n\n FRIEDRICH MAX M\u00dcLLER\n\n H. V\u00c1MB\u00c9RY\n\n THE PIONEERS OF SEMITIC, ARYAN, AND TURCO-TATARIC PHILOLOGY\n\n This Work is Dedicated\n\n BY THE AUTHOR AND THE TRANSLATOR\n\n\n\n\n _Errata._\n\nP. 13 line 5 from below, _for_ \u2018with all his advanced ideas\u2019 _read_\n \u2018notwithstanding the progress of modern ideas.\u2019\n\nP. 209, first line of note, after \u2018ball,\u2019 _insert_ \u2018that descended from\n heaven.\u2019 Whether this feather-ball\n\n\n\n\n TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.\n\n ------------------\n\n\nConscious that Comparative Mythology is not very generally studied even\nin England, where some of the earliest and ablest expositions of its\nprinciples have appeared, I foresee that this work is likely to fall\ninto the hands of many who have not the preliminary intellectual\ntraining necessary to an appreciation of its principles. If anyone takes\nup the book with an idea that it will settle anything in the history of\nthe Jews, he will be disappointed. Its aim is not theological nor\nhistorical, but mythological; and Mythology precedes History and\nTheology, and has nothing to do with them, except as a factor that may\nto a certain extent determine their form. To understand this book fully,\nsome previous knowledge of what has already been done on the field of\nComparative Mythology is essential. This is easily obtained by reference\nto the various works of Prof. Max M\u00fcller and Rev. G.W. Cox, which are\nfrequently quoted.[1] Such studies will enable the reader to see how far\nDr. Goldziher is merely treading in the footsteps of others, and how far\nhe has struck out a new track. Speaking generally, it may be said that\nhe acknowledges the principles of the science as laid down by Kuhn and\nMax M\u00fcller, but that the application to the Semitic nations is his own.\nThis application was, indeed, first attempted, fifteen years ago, by\nProfessor H. Steinthal of Berlin with reference to one special\nmythological cycle, in Essays which, on p. xxix of his Introduction, Dr.\nGoldziher urgently recommends the reader to study as a suitable\npreparation for this book, since they \u2018showed for the first time and on\na large scale how the matter of the Hebrew legends yields to\nmythological analysis,\u2019 and contain matter which is left out here\nprecisely because it is to be had there. Through the obligingness of the\npublishers I am enabled to present the English reader with a translation\nof these Essays, whereby he is put in a position of no disadvantage as\ncompared with the German. They will also serve the purpose of showing\nthat the principles of Semitic Mythology were asserted in weighty words\nby a philosopher of high repute many years ago. But Dr. Goldziher has in\nthe present work for the first time extended the application of the\nprinciples of Comparative Mythology to the entire domain of Hebrew\nMythology, and laid down a broad foundation of theory, on which the\nelaboration of special points may be subsequently built up. Both these\nauthors, it will be seen, regard a systematic working out of the results\nof Psychological science as the fundamental pillar of Mythological\nstudies; and the reader will consequently find some psychological\npreparation not less necessary to the full understanding of the book\nthan a knowledge of what has been written on Comparative Mythology.\n\nThe translation has received so many additions and corrections made\nexpressly for it by the author, that it is far superior to the original\nGerman edition; moreover, it has been thoroughly revised by the author\nin proof.\n\nI have added a few notes, where they seemed to be wanted; they are\nalways distinguished (by \u2018TR.\u2019) from the author\u2019s own. The Index is also\ncompiled by me.\n\nReferences to the Old Testament are made to the original Hebrew; in the\nfew cases where the chapter or verse bears a different number in the\nEnglish and other modern versions, the reference to the latter is added\nin brackets.\n\nI have adopted a few peculiarities of orthography, which I ought to\nconfess to, the more so as I hope others may be convinced of their\nreasonableness. _Nazirite_, _Hivvite_, are corrections of positive\nblunders in spelling of the English Bible. _Hivite_ was probably written\nin obedience to an unwritten law of English spelling which forbids the\ndoubling of _v_; whether there is now any sense in this precept (which\nmust have originated when _vv_ would be confounded with _w_) or not, at\nleast it ought not to be extended to foreign names. The tendency of the\nage to dispense with the Latin diphthongs _\u00e6_, _\u0153_ (which were a few\ngenerations ago used in _\u00e6ra_, _\u0153conomy_, _\u00c6gypt_, etc.), I have\nventured to anticipate in similar words, such as _esthetic_, _Phenicia_,\n_Phenix_. The anomaly of the French spelling of the Greek word\n_programme_, alongside of _anagram_, _diagram_, _parallelogram_, seems\nto me sufficient condemnation of the form.\n\nIn the Hebrew and Arabic quotations the Latin alphabet has been used\nthroughout. The transliteration of the following letters should be\nnoted, as being the only ones about which there could be any doubt:\u2014\u0627 \u05d0\ncommencing a syllable in the middle of a word = \u02be. \u05e2\u200e \ufeca\u200e = \u02bf. \ufece = \u0121. \ufe9d =\nj. \ufea1 = \u1e25 \u05d4\u200e \ufea5\u200e = ch. \u05db\u200e \u0643 = k. \u05e7\u200e \u0642\u200e = \u1e33. \u05ea\u200e \u062a\u200e \u06c3\u200e = t. \u05d8\u200e \u0637\u200e = \u1e6d. \u0638 =\n\u1e93. \u05e1\u200e \u05e9\u05c2\u200e \u0633 = s. \u05e9\u05c1\u200e \u0634 = sh. \u062b = th. \u0630 = \u1e0f. \u05e6\u200e \u0635 = \u1e63. \u0636 = \u1e0d. \u05d5 as\nconsonant generally = v, but \u0648 = w. \u05d9\u200e \u0649 as consonant = y. The aspirated\n_\u05ea\u05e4\u05db\u05d1_ are written bh (to be pronounced v), kh, ph, th. In Hebrew \u0103 \u0115 \u014f\ndenote either the ordinary short vowels or the ch\u00e2\u1e6d\u00eaph vowels; and \u0115\nalso the vocal sheva. In Arabic texts the i\u02bfr\u00e2b is omitted in prose, but\npreserved in verse on account of the metre. These principles of\ntransliteration are the same which the author adopts in the German\nedition, with a few modifications which seemed desirable for English\nreaders, especially the use of the letters j, th and y with their usual\nEnglish force.\n\n RUSSELL MARTINEAU.\n\nLONDON: _January 1877._\n\n CONTENTS.\n\n TRANSLATOR\u2019S PREFACE vii\n\n\n INTRODUCTION xiii\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n\n ON HEBREW MYTHOLOGY 1\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n\n SOURCES OF HEBREW MYTHOLOGY 17\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n\n THE METHOD OF INVESTIGATING HEBREW MYTHS 35\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n\n NOMADISM AND AGRICULTURE 49\n\n\n CHAPTER V.\n\n THE MOST PROMINENT FIGURES IN HEBREW MYTHOLOGY 90\n\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n\n THE MYTH OF CIVILISATION AND THE FIRST SHAPING OF HEBREW 198\n RELIGION\n\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n\n INFLUENCE OF THE AWAKING NATIONAL IDEA ON THE TRANSFORMATION 231\n OF THE HEBREW MYTH\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n\n COMMENCEMENT OF MONOTHEISM AND THE DIFFERENTIATION OF THE 259\n MYTHS\n\n\n CHAPTER IX.\n\n PROPHETISM AND THE JAHVEH RELIGION 290\n\n\n CHAPTER X.\n\n THE HEBREW MYTH IN THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY 316\n\n\n EXCURSUS 337\n\n\n APPENDIX.\n\n _Two Essays by H. Steinthal._\n\n 1. THE ORIGINAL FORM OF THE LEGEND OF PROMETHEUS 363\n\n\n 2. THE LEGEND OF SAMSON 392\n\n\n INDEX 447\n\n\n\n\n INTRODUCTION.\n\n ------------------\n\n\nThe following sheets make no claim to present a _system_ of Hebrew\nMythology. I have left out much that would necessarily be included in a\nsystem, and confined myself to a limited portion of what can be proved\nto be the matter of the Hebrew myths. Even within the actual domain of\nmy labours, I was not anxious to subject the extant narratives in all\ntheir minutest features to mythological analysis. The application of the\ncertain results of the science of Mythology in general to a domain\nhitherto almost ignored with reference to this subject, could only be\naccomplished by some self-limitation on the part of the author; and my\nimmediate task was only to show that Semitism in general, and Hebrew in\nparticular, could not be exceptions to the laws of mythological enquiry\nestablished on the basis of psychology and the science of language, and\nthat it is possible from Semitism itself, on psychological and\nphilological principles, to construct a scientific Semitic Mythology.\n\nBy blindly tracing out copious matters of detail, the investigator of\nmyths is very easily and unconsciously seduced to the slippery ground of\nimprobabilities; and therefore I preferred, in the first instance, to\nenlarge only on subjects on which I was confident of being able to\npresent what was self-evident, and in these only, so to speak, to reveal\nthe first cellular formations, from which later growths were produced,\nand to leave the analysis of the entire substance, and of the separate\nelements which complete the conception of the mythical figures, to a\nfuture time, when the science will have gained a firmer footing even on\nthe Semitic domain, and will have less distrust and misunderstanding to\ncontend against. I am myself responsible for this limitation of the\nsubject, in the service of which, encouraged by kind friends, I resolved\nto publish the following pages. In mythological affairs I acknowledge\nmyself a pupil of the school established on the Aryan domain by Ad. Kuhn\nand Max M\u00fcller. Only in certain points, which, however, occasionally\ntouch upon first principles, I have been compelled to differ from the\nmasters of Comparative Mythology. It may be boldly asserted that,\nespecially through Max M\u00fcller\u2019s literary labours, Comparative Mythology\nand the Science of Religion have been added to those chapters of human\nknowledge with which certain borderlands of science cannot dispense, and\nwhich can claim to have become an essential portion of general\nculture.[2] This conviction must excuse frequent copiousness of\nexposition, which I have adopted knowingly and intentionally. I have had\nin my eye not only the small circle of professional mythologists on the\nAryan and other domains, but also the larger circle of educated readers\nwho will be interested in learning how the results of Comparative\nMythology shape themselves when applied to Semitic nations. But, on the\nother hand, I must crave the indulgence of the latter readers, if I have\nnot always succeeded (especially in the fifth chapter) in making my\nmeaning as intelligible as I could wish. For it is a fact that the\nSemitic still remains further removed from the mind of educated society\nthan the Aryan, which, through the study of classical antiquity, has so\nensnared us from our school-days with its irresistible charms, that it\ncan never cease to determine the direction of our thought and action.\nTherefore I have had resort to foreign examples, sometimes non-Semitic\ninstances from antiquity, sometimes instances from modern poets, for\nillustrations of particular assertions, which otherwise would appear\nimprobable, but could thus be brought nearer to the understanding. From\nthe figures used by poets the wealth and variety of the mythical\napperception of the primeval man is truly elucidated. Here and there I\nhave also permitted myself to make reference to Hungarian idioms, which\nwas very natural, as I originally composed this book in my Hungarian\nmother-tongue for the purpose of University lectures, and then\ntranslated it myself into German. Some parts of these essays have been\nalready published in Hungarian, in a different connexion and with\nspecial reference to linguistic results, in the first and second parts\nof Vol. XII. of the _Nyelvtudom\u00e1nyi K\u00f6zlem\u00e9nyek_ (Philological Essays),\nedited by Paul Hunfalvy for the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.\n\nIn adducing Aryan parallels, I am very far from thinking that where the\nHebrew exhibits a striking similarity to something Aryan it has borrowed\nfrom the latter, or that, as a recent scholar tried to make out, the\nHebrews themselves were originally Aryans, who afterwards took a Semitic\nlanguage and preserved their Aryan habits of thought. I start from the\nconviction that the Myth is something universal, that the faculty of\nforming it cannot _a priori_ be denied to any race as such, and that the\ncoincidence of mythical ideas and modes of expression is the result of\nthe uniformity of the psychological process which is the foundation of\nthe creation of myths in all races; and this very uniformity of mythical\nideas may consequently serve to psychologists as an argument for the\nthesis of the psychological uniformity of all races.[3] \u2018Where no\nhistorical transference of myths can be proved,\u2019 says Bastian very\njustly,[4] \u2018the uniformity must be referred to the organic law of the\ngrowth of the mind, which will everywhere put forth similar products,\ncorresponding and alike, but variously modified by surrounding\ninfluences.\u2019 The oldest history of paleography exhibits on the\nideographic and figurative stage the most striking similarities in the\nmodes of apperception belonging to nations of the most various races.\nLenormant says: \u2018Nous pourrions faire voir, si nous voulions nous\nlaisser aller \u00e0 la tentation d\u2019entreprendre un petit trait\u00e9 de\nl\u2019\u00e9criture symbolique chez les diff\u00e9rents peuples, comment certaines\nm\u00e9taphores naturelles ont \u00e9t\u00e9 con\u00e7ues spontan\u00e9ment par plusieurs races\ndiverses sans communication les unes avec les autres, et comment, par\nsuite, le m\u00eame symbole se retrouve avec le m\u00eame sens dans plusieurs\nsyst\u00e8mes d\u2019origine tout-\u00e0-fait ind\u00e9pendante. L\u2019exemple le plus frappant\npeut-\u00eatre de ce genre est celui du symbole de l\u2019abeille, qui, ainsi que\nnous venons de le dire, signifie Roi dans les hi\u00e9roglyphes \u00e9gyptiens, et\nse reconna\u00eet encore clairement dans le type le plus ancien de\nl\u2019id\u00e9ogramme dou\u00e9 du m\u00eame sens dans le cun\u00e9iforme anarien.\u2019[5] The same\nlesson is taught by Prehistoric Archeology, the comparative study of\nwhich among the various races would present very instructive examples.\nIn our museums we see identical implements used by men of the most\nvarious races at the same primitive stage of civilisation,[6] yet in\nthis case the idea of one having borrowed from another enters no one\u2019s\nhead. Why should we be surprised at meeting with the very same\nphenomenon in Comparative Mythology?\n\nThe uniformity of the Hebrew myths with those of nations belonging to\nother races only becomes an obvious fact when we apply the method of\nmodern mythological enquiry to Semitic stories. But, even without the\nhelp of this method, the mere outside of the Hebrew stories attracted\nthe attention of many enquirers. It occasionally gave rise to the\nabsurdest aberrations, which even now shoot out into a fresh crop of\nmischief. One answer, of course, was always at hand\u2014that Greek and\nEgyptian narratives and \u2018theogonies\u2019 were bad translations or \u2018diluted\u2019\nversions of the Hebrew; or else, as it has often been attempted in\nrecent times to prove, the Egyptian was the original, from which\neverything else had flowed. The eighteenth century was especially rich\nin literary productions of the first species, following the lead of\nGerhard Johann Voss, Huet,[7] Bochart, and others whose labours had\nprepared the way. G. Croesius published at Dort, in 1704, \u2018\u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\n\u1f19\u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2, sive Historia Hebraeorum ab Homero Hebraicis nominibus ac\nsententiis conscripta in Odyssea et Iliade,\u2019 and V.G. Herklitz at\nLeipzig two years later, 1706, \u2018Quod Hercules idem sit ac Josua.\u2019 At\nAmsterdam a book was published in 1721 entitled \u2018Parallela \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 et Historiae Sacrae,\u2019 having the same object; and in 1730 a\nbook in two volumes, of similar tendency, by Guillaume de Lavaur, an\n_avocat_, was published at Paris in French, and translated into German\nby Johann Daniel Heyden (Leipzig, 1745).[8] But it was reserved for the\nend of the century to produce the most curious specimen, in the work\nentitled \u2018Histoire v\u00e9ritable des Temps Fabuleux: ouvrage qui, en\nd\u00e9voilant le vrai que les histoires fabuleuses ont travesti et alt\u00e9r\u00e9,\nsert \u00e0 \u00e9claircir les antiquit\u00e9s des peuples et surtout \u00e0 venger\nl\u2019histoire sainte,\u2019 by the Abb\u00e9 Gu\u00e9rin du Rocher. I have not seen the\noriginal edition of this work, but have consulted a later edition\nprepared by the Abb\u00e9 Chapelle, an admirer of the author (Paris and\nBesan\u00e7on, 1824), in five volumes, of which the first three contain the\noriginal work, and the fourth and fifth are taken up by the editor with\na recapitulation of principles and a defence against the attacks of\nantagonists, who count among their number such men as Voltaire, De la\nHarpe, De Guignes, Du Voisin, Dinouart, and Anquetil du Perron. The\nauthor undertook to prove that the entire ancient history of the\nEgyptians and other nations is only a repetition of Biblical narratives:\nthat thus what is related of Bothyris, Orpheus, Menes, Sesostris, and\nothers, is identical with the Biblical history of Abraham, Jacob, Lot,\nNoah, and others; even the Egyptian Thebes is not a city, but Noah\u2019s\nark. The influence which this sensational book exercised on the learning\nof the period is very characteristic of the times. Dr. Asselini, vicar\nof the diocese of Paris, who had to pass judgment on it for the\ncensorship (1779), regards it as a vindication of the Bible. The\nSorbonne appropriated Gu\u00e9rin\u2019s theorems, and made them the subject of\ntheses for graduation. The King of Poland read the work through, and\nsent his compliments to the author. The French government accorded the\nAbb\u00e9 an annual pension of 1,200 livres. One reviewer compares Gu\u00e9rin\u2019s\ndiscoveries to those of Columbus and Newton; and a poetical panegyrist\nsees in them a French counterpoise to the superiority in science then\npossessed by England in virtue of discoveries of the first rank in\nphysical science. He says\u2014\n\n Fi\u00e8re et docte Albion, qui dans un coin des mers\n Pr\u00e9tends aux premier rang de la litt\u00e9rature,\n Pour avoir \u00e0 vos yeux d\u00e9voil\u00e9 l\u2019univers\n Et le vrai plan de la nature,\n De tes discours hautains rabaisse enfin le ton;\n La France, ta rivale, va \u00e9galer ta gloire.\n Ce que pour la physique a fait le grand Newton,\n Du Rocher l\u2019a fait pour l\u2019histoire.\n\nBut even on the very threshold of the second part of our century, in\n1849, a systematic argument was conducted, to show that Livy had read\nthe Bible, and based his description of T. Manlius Torquatus\u2019 battle\nwith the Gauls on that of David and his battle with the Philistine\ngiant; and twenty-two similarities between the respective stories had to\ndo duty as demonstrations.[9] The unscientific mode of regarding these\nsubjects prevailing up to the most recent time has not yet ceased to\ngenerate absurdities.\n\nWe see old-fashioned absurdities still finding a way to the general\nreading public by means of encyclopedias, as in a \u2018Dictionary of the\nMythology of all Nations,\u2019 of which a third edition was recently\npublished.[10] This work in its new form comes before the public with a\ntouching delivery against modern physical science by way of\nintroduction. Here we read under _Abraham_, \u2018Some scholars are inclined\nto make this celebrated Patriarch of the Jewish nation either the god\nBrahma himself or a Brahman who was obliged to leave India in the\ncontest between the worshippers of Siva and those of Brahma. _In truth,\nthere is much that might lead to such a conjecture._ In Sanskrit the\nword \u2018earth\u2019 is often expressed by _Brahm_ or _Abrahm_. Abraham\u2019s wife\nwas named Sarah; Brahma\u2019s wife was Sara (Sarasvati)\u2019 etc. But sins of a\ndifferent kind also are committed up to the present day. The Hebrews are\nsaid to have borrowed their myths from foreign parts. It is not only by\nVoltaire and men of his age and spirit that this assumption is made. It\nis expressed in a recent article by a learned German investigator\nintended for the widest circulation. Sepp writes, 'No nation has been so\nclever as the Hebrews in appropriating to themselves the property of\nothers, both intellectual and material. What can we say to the fact that\nthe sun\u2019s standing still at Joshua\u2019s bidding, with the purpose of\nenabling the Hebrews to complete the slaughter of the Amalekites, is\n_directly borrowed from Homer_ (_Il._ ii. 412), where the poetical\nhyperbole \u2018Let not the sun go down, O Zeus,\u2019 etc., is put into the mouth\nof Agamemnon?... To be brief, the popular hero Samson has had the Twelve\nLabours of the Lybian Herakles transferred to him, and bears the doors,\nas Sandon or Melkart the pillars of the world, on his shoulders.'[11]\nThe reader will agree with me in regarding it as superfluous at the\npresent day to attempt a serious refutation of the hypothesis of\n_borrowing_, which assails the originality of the most primitive\nmythological ideas known to the nation under review. But it is\nimpossible to evade the obligation to find an explanation of the\nmanifold coincidences exhibited in the independently produced myths of\nnations belonging to quite different races. Under the new method of\nmythological enquiry this obligation is doubly pressing; for the\ncoincidences appear yet more surprising, and occupy a more extensive\nsphere when the myths are considered analytically by the light of the\nnew method, and from a linguistic point of view. Only then does the\nidentity become psychologically important. And then it can in my view be\nexplained only by the rejection of the prejudice that there are\nunmythological races, or at least one race incapable of forming any\nmyths\u2014the Semitic. If the Myth is a form of life of the human mind\npsychologically necessary at a certain stage of growth, then the\nintellectual life of every individual, nation, and race must pass\nthrough it. \u2018The tendency of modern enquiry is more and more toward the\nconclusion that if law is anywhere, it is everywhere,\u2019 as Tylor\nmaintains.[12] This means, applied to the present question, that if the\nformation of myths is a natural law of the \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae (mind) at a certain\nstage, it must necessarily occur everywhere where there is a beginning\nof intellectual life, unless we could speak of whole races or tribes as\npsychologically pathologic,[13] and make the whole Semitic race thus\npathologic on account of its alleged incapacity to form myths\u2014which\nwould, after all, be rather a curious proceeding. No doubt we often read\nin ethnological works of nations without a trace of Mythology. But we\nought not to forget either that such informants understand by Mythology\nonly complicated stories and fables, which in my view represent the more\nadvanced stage of mythic development, or that they identify Mythology\nwith heathen religious ideas, and confound absence of religion or\natheism with want of myths. So, e.g., Sir John Lubbock says, quoting\nSibree,[14] \u2018Even in Madagascar, according to a good authority, \u201cthere\nis nothing corresponding to a Mythology, _or any fables of gods or\ngoddesses_, amongst the Malagasy;\u201d\u2019 but this want of stories of gods and\ngoddesses is very far from demonstrating the absence of myths of all and\nevery sort.\n\nIt would be worth while in this connexion to pursue a thought raised by\nSchelling, with the aid of the present more advanced ideas on the\npsychology of nations. According to Schelling,[15] a nation becomes a\nnation through community of consciousness between the individuals; and\nthis community has its foundation in a common view of the world, and\nthis again in Mythology. Consequently in Schelling\u2019s system absence of\nMythology can only occur in circles of men in which nationality is as\nyet unformed, and the necessary community undeveloped. But to Schelling\n\u2018it appears impossible, because inconceivable, that a _Nation should be\nwithout Mythology_.\u2019 However the question may stand with reference to\nsavage tribes, modern science cannot possibly support the old thesis\nconcerning the Semitic Hebrews of their incapacity for Mythology.\n\nGuided by this conviction, I lay down at starting the necessity of\nsubjecting the material of the Hebrew myths to the same psychological\nand linguistic analysis which has contributed so much light to the\nconsideration of the beginnings of intellectual life in the Aryan race.\n\nI do not conceal from myself that the acknowledgment of the legitimacy\nof this method for Semitic things may be exposed to many attacks. For\neven on Aryan ground the results which the school of Kuhn and Max M\u00fcller\nhave brought to light do not enjoy that general acceptation which ought\nto reward such sound investigations\u2014investigations, moreover, the basis\nof which is being constantly extended by later writers such as G.W. Cox\nand De Gubernatis. Both in Germany and in England this school has\nnotable adversaries. I do not speak of Julius Braun, who, in his\n_Naturgeschichte der Sage_ (Natural History of Legend), thought to\nundermine the solid substratum of Comparative Mythology by extending to\nthe domain of mythology the consequences of his theory of the history of\nart and of R\u00f6the\u2019s assumptions, and by fetching from Egypt the\nfoundation-stone on which to construct a Science of Mythology\u2014an attempt\nwhich turned out most unfortunate, especially in etymology. But some\nworthy partisans of the study of classical literature refuse to receive\nthe results of the science of Comparative Mythology. One of these is K.\nLehrs;[16] another is the latest German editor of Hesiod, who objects to\nthe modern science of Mythology that it ignores historical and\nphilological criticism and seizes upon every passage of an author that\nsuits its theory, without regard to its value and genuineness.[17] Among\nthe English scholars it is no less a writer than Fergusson who declares,\n\u2018So far as I am capable of understanding it, it appears to me that the\nancient Solar Myth of Messrs. Max M\u00fcller and Cox is very like mere\nmodern moonshine.\u2019[18] And Mr. George Smith, the renowned pioneer of the\nancient Assyrian literature, seems not to have much confidence in the\nlatest method of mythological investigation; for he says in his latest\nbook,[19] \u2018The early poems and stories of almost every nation are by\nsome writers resolved into elaborate descriptions of natural phenomena;\nand in some cases, if that were true, the myth would have taken to\ncreate it a genius as great as that of the philosophers who explain it.\u2019\nSo that the so-called \u2018Solar theory\u2019 is far from being generally adopted\neven on the domain where it was first brought out and has been most\nfirmly established. But the adherents of the school of Max M\u00fcller may\ntake comfort from the consideration that the accusations made against\nthem hit only those who have ridden the theory too hard, since, as Tylor\nsays, no allegory, no nursery-rhyme, is safe from the speculations of\nsome fanatical mythological theoriser. \u2018Much abused\u2019 is a correct\nepithet used of the Solar theory by a learned English Assyriologist,\nhimself a friend of it.[20] If, then, on Aryan ground the legitimacy of\nthe new method is not undisputed, how will it be on Semitic, and\nespecially on Hebrew ground, which a prejudice prevalent far and wide\nhas decided to be occupied by a race and a nation with no mythology at\nall? Nevertheless, I hope I have kept myself free from abuse and\nextravagance in these essays. I have endeavoured sedulously to avoid\nwhatever, on the Aryan domain, aroused the distrust of the hesitating,\nby showing no anxiety to gain immediate command of the whole extent of\nthe mythological field. The essential point at the commencement of these\nmatters is not the elucidation of all the minute details, but rather the\nsolution of the general questions that arise, and the accurate laying\ndown of a sound method of investigation. What I have brought forward I\nwish to be regarded as a collection of examples of the application of\nthe method.\n\nThe reader will observe that I have given to the conception of the myth\na narrower scope than is usually done. I believe it necessary to\nseparate it strictly from the conception of religion, and especially to\nexclude from the sphere of primitive mythology the questions of\nCosmogony and Ethics (the origin of Evil). The latter point was of\nespecial importance in reference to the Hebrew Myth, since, as I show in\nthe last chapter, the solution of these questions by the Hebrews was\nproduced in the later period of civilisation and from a foreign impulse.\nThere is an immense difference between the ancient mythical view of the\norigin of nature and that later cosmogonic system. So long as mythical\nideas are still living in the mind, though under an altered form, when\nthe times are ripe for cosmogonic speculations, a cosmogony appears as a\nstage of development of the ancient myth. But when the myth has utterly\nvanished from consciousness, then the mind is ready to receive foreign\ncosmogonic ideas, which can be fitted into the frame of its religious\nthought and accommodated to its religious views. This was the case with\nthe Hebrews; and hence it will be understood why I have not treated as\nHebrew mythical matter the Cosmogony of Genesis, which, moreover,\naccording to all appearance, is to be regarded rather as a mere literary\ncreation than as a view of the origin of things emanating directly from\nthe mind of the people.\n\nIt appeared desirable to give a few chapters to show what I imagined the\ncourse of development of the primitive myths to have been, before they\nattained the form in which they are presented to us in literature. The\nmythological question is indeed quite distinct from that concerning the\nhistory of literature, and there is only a distant connexion between the\ntwo. The purpose of the following pages is, strictly speaking, attained\nwhere that of the literary history of the Canon commences; and I would\ngladly have kept aloof from the literary question, which cannot yet be\nregarded as even nearly settled. But when I included in my task the\ndescription of the further course of development of the myth, it was\nobviously impossible to stand so entirely aloof. I have on many points\ndeviated from the current views, without being able either to enter into\nso complete a justification of the deviation as is generally reasonably\nexpected, and the importance and scope of the subject would demand, or\nto refer to all the suggestive and original works contributed,\nespecially by Germany and Holland, to the elucidation of the problems in\nquestion. For this point, which is only accessory to the real subject of\nmy work, would require to be treated in a separate monograph, which it\nwas not my intention to give. On the other hand, it was impossible to\nleave these questions quite on one side. On the Pentateuch question I\nstart from the principles of Graf, which at first were adopted solely by\nthe learned Professor Kuenen of Leyden, but have recently found zealous\npromoters also in England[21] and Germany\u2014in the latter country\nespecially in the works of Kayser (Strasburg, 1874), and Duhm (Bonn,\n1875).[22] Nevertheless, the section on Jahveism and Prophetism has\nturned out more lengthy than considerations of symmetry would sanction.\nI must confess that my personal sympathy with and affection for this\nportion of the history of religion places me too close to it to allow\nme, when once brought face to face with it, to impose on my pen a\nreserve which perhaps is desirable for the sake of equilibrium. All this\nobliges me to count on the kind indulgence of my readers for the second\nportion, which may be termed the historical.\n\nIt remains to say a few words about previous works of the same\ncharacter. Some earlier writings there are on Hebrew Mythology. But it\nneeds not to be specially insisted on that Nork\u2019s muddle-headed works,\nsuch as his \u2018Biblical Mythology of the Old and New Testament,\u2019 his\n\u2018Etymological-symbolical-mythological Cyclopedia for Biblical Students,\nArcheologists, and Artists,\u2019[23] and other books of his, and similar\nattempts by others,[24] which have tended to discredit the school of\nCreuzer rather than to gain lasting adherents to it, do not deserve to\nbe regarded as anything but passing aberrations. Braun\u2019s \u2018Natural\nHistory of Legend: Reference of all Religious Ideas, Legends, and\nSystems to their Common Stock and Ultimate Root\u2019[25] maintains a more\nserious and dignified tone, but is a kind of anachronism built on an\nantiquated theory, and not happier in its etymological identifications\nand derivations than Nork\u2019s writings. I think that no branch of the\nscience of History and Civilisation can be advanced to satisfactory\nresults when the following thesis is laid down as an axiom: \u2018It is a\nfundamental law of the nature of the human mind never to invent anything\nas long as it is possible to copy\u2019\u2014which is the starting-point of\nBraun's studies. It would be quite as difficult to rest satisfied at the\npresent day with the method which Buttmann follows in treating of Hebrew\nMythology.\n\nThere are many smaller excursus by Biblical expositors and historians,\nwho set out from the standpoint of the earlier views on the relation of\nthe Myth to the Legend, and more frequently from the exegetical point of\nview. Among these ought especially to be named Ewald\u2019s section on the\nsubject in the first volume of his \u2018History of Israel,\u2019 Tuch\u2019s short\ntreatise \u2018Legend and Myth\u2019 in the general introduction to his Commentary\non Genesis, as well as several dissertations by the indefatigable\nN\u00f6ldeke in his \u2018_Untersuchungen_\u2019 (Investigations) and elsewhere. It is\nobvious that these performances, though in every sense noteworthy and of\npermanent value, could not draw into their sphere of observation those\npreliminary questions which in the subsequent investigations of Kuhn and\nMax M\u00fcller removed to a greater distance the goal of mythological\nenquiry. Steinthal, who did so much for the psychological basis of the\nnew tendency of mythological science, was the first to merit the praise\nof making Comparative Mythology fruitful on Hebrew ground. His\ndissertations on the Story of Prometheus and the Story of Samson[26]\nshowed for the first time, and on a large scale, how the matter of the\nHebrew legends yields to mythological analysis. I would on this occasion\nbeg the reader to have the kindness to read these pioneer-articles of\nSteinthal\u2019s, to complete the matter left undiscussed in my work, as I\nconsidered it superfluous repetition to work up a second time what was\nsufficiently expounded there. Steinthal must consequently be regarded as\nthe founder of mythological science on Hebrew ground. He has again\nrecently given some suggestive hints on this subject in a short article,\nin which he again defends the capacity of the Semitic race to form\nmyths.[27] It is only to be regretted that the commencement made by\nSteinthal in this science has not been followed up for more than fifteen\nyears.[28] Steinthal\u2019s two dissertations gave me the first impulse to\nthe composition of this work; and my purpose was confirmed by the words\nof the ingenious Italian Angelo de Gubernatis, who, in his \u2018Zoological\nMythology\u2019 (which appeared at the very time when I was maturing my\npurpose of putting together into one work this series of essays\noriginally written as lectures), eloquently designates the subject of my\nresearches the next problem of Comparative Mythology.[29] The words in\nwhich he recommends the study of Hebrew Mythology in the spirit of the\nnew method seem to me very striking. It is my earnest conviction that\nnot only the interests of learning, but also preeminently the religious\nlife of the present age make it important to gain for this subject an\nacknowledged position in learned literature. For he who feels the true\nmeaning of religion must welcome these studies as a step in advance\ntowards the highest ideal of religion, towards Monotheism pure and\nunsullied by anything coarse or pagan, which is independent of legends\nand traditions of race, and has its centre, its exclusive element of\nlife, and its impulse towards never-resting enquiry and self-perfection,\nin aspiration after the single living Source of all truth and morality.\nI am convinced that every step which we take towards a correct\nappreciation of the Mythical brings us nearer to that centre. The\nconfusion of the Mythical with the Religious makes religious life\ncentrifugal; it is the duty of the progressive tendency on this domain\nto confirm a centripetal tendency.[30] The recognition of this relation\nbetween pure Monotheism and the oldest historical portion of the\nBiblical literature does not date from yesterday or to-day; the most\nideal representative of Hebrew Monotheism, in whom Jahveism as an\nharmonious conception of the universe attained its climax, the Prophet\nof the Captivity himself, described this relation in clear terms (Is.\nLXIII. 16; see _infra_, p. 229).\n\nBut while, on the one hand, the investigation of Hebrew myths gives a\nstimulus to religious thought to advance in the direction of a\nMonotheism purified from all dross; on the other, the employment of the\nmethod offered to the Hebrew stories by Comparative Mythology in its\nlatest stage, paves the way for a more serious treatment of the old\nBiblical stories. It cannot be denied that there is no little frivolity\nin the idea that those stories were invented at a certain time, no\nmatter whether _bona_ or _mala fide_, by persons guided by some\ninterest, or affected by some leaning, of their own. It is no more\nsatisfactory to be told that the stories were not _invented_, but\n_sprang up_ naturally, and then to find that no answer is forthcoming to\nthe question, _How_ that could be? The modern science of Comparative\nMythology has washed the teachers of the human race clean of the\nsuspicion of mystification and deceptive principles. The origination of\nthe stories is, at the outset, claimed for an antiquity higher than even\nthe most orthodox apologists could ever exhibit. Now for the first time\nwe can learn to appreciate them as spontaneous acts of the human mind;\nwe perceive that they arose through the same psychological process which\ngave us language also; that, like language itself, they were the very\noldest manifestation of activity of the mind, and burst forth from it\n\u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 not \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, at the very threshold of its history; and subsequently\ntransformed and developed themselves again quite spontaneously, on the\nattainment of a higher stage of civilisation, by processes of national\npsychology, and most certainly not by the cunning ingenuity and the\nworldly wisdom of certain leading classes.\n\nLast year Dr. Martin Schultze announced a \u2018Mythology of the Hebrews in\nits connexion with those of the Indogermans and of the Egyptians\u2019[31] as\nabout to appear. The method followed by the author in a preliminary\nspecimen[32] was not such as to induce me to delay the publication of my\nwork and wait for his, even though he promised to give a complete\nsystem, which was not my intention.[33] My manuscript was already in the\npublishers\u2019 hands, when the papers announced the publication of a\nlearned book by Dr. Grill, \u2018The Patriarchs of Mankind: a contribution\ntowards the establishment of a Science of Hebrew Archeology;\u2019[34] and\nmore than ten sheets were printed before I could gather, from a review\nof it in the _Jenaer Literaturzeitung_, in how close a connexion it\nstood to the subject of my book; for from the title alone I was not\nlikely to suspect anything on Mythology. I cannot pretend to explain in\na few lines my opinion of so large a book as Dr. Grill\u2019s. But as he\nstarts with the assumption of the impossibility of a Semitic Mythology,\nand endeavours to establish the view that the Hebrew Myth is that of an\nIndogermanic people, that the Hebrews were Indogermans, and that the\nHebrew mythological proper names can find an etymology only in Sanskrit,\nI have great pleasure in referring him to p. 25 and to Chapter V. of my\nbook, where he may convince himself that no very daring etymological\nleaps nor arbitrary assumptions of phonological laws of transformation\nare necessary to explain the Hebrew mythological figures and their\nappellations from the Semitic languages themselves. It must, no doubt,\nbe admitted that in some cases\u2014but the minority\u2014the formation of the\nproper names used in Mythology is not quite in accordance with\ngrammatical analogy. I account for this by the peculiar feature of the\nSemitic languages, that an appellative on becoming a proper name often\ntakes a peculiar form, differing in some respect from that of the\noriginal appellative: \u2018al-\u02bfadl li-l-\u02bfalam\u00eeyy\u00e2,\u2019 as the Arabian\ngrammarians say.[35] There will always be _cruces_. Is it possible to\nindicate a satisfactory etymon for every proper name of the Greek\nmythology? and if not, ought we on that account to explain the Greek out\nof Semitic, whenever a case occurs which tempts us to do so, as our\nlearned ancestors did?[36] For transformation is always easy to find;\nsince etymology is allowed to be a science in which the consonants go\nfor but little, and the vowels have nothing at all to say for\nthemselves! It certainly seems a pity to waste ingenuity in trying to\nbanish out of the Semitic stock names which sound Semitic and can be\nrecognised as such without the employment of any law of transformation\nat all, like Yipht\u00e2ch (Jephthah), N\u00f4ach (Noah), and Debh\u00f4r\u00e2 (Deborah),\nand in dissolving by Sanskrit solvents the Hebrew impress of a word like\nYeh\u00f4sh\u00fba\u02bf (Joshua), produced by Jahveism out of the original H\u00f4sh\u00eaa\u02bf,\nand not even mythical at all, in order to make it into a \u2018Dog of\nHeaven,\u2019 instead of \u2018He has holpen\u2019 or \u2018enlarged [the people\u2019s\npossessions],\u2019 i.e. \u2018The Helper.\u2019[37] Pinechas (Phinehas), no doubt, is\na word that might drive the etymologist to despair. But there is far\nmore intrinsic probability in Lauth\u2019s Egyptian interpretation[38] than\nin Grill\u2019s Sanskrit _tour de force_, especially considering that\nEgyptian proper names cannot be explained away out of the Old Testament,\nand have in history a positive reason for existence. Then why hover in\nthe dream-land of a prehistoric connexion with the Aryans?\n\nWhen the Arabian traditionary stories are once subjected to etymological\ntreatment, it will appear how far Semitism is from utter deficiency of\nMythology. In certain instances I have taken occasion to demonstrate\nthis with reference to Arabian tradition in the course of this work\n(e.g. p. 182 _et seq._, p. 334 _et seq._). In other cases no reference\nto the etymological meaning of the proper names is required to recognise\ntrue Arabian myths. Instances are found especially in the stories about\nthe constellations. Al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee informs us that \u2018the old Arabs say that\nthe star al-Dabar\u00e2n wooed the Pleiades, but the latter constellation\nwould have nothing to do with the suitor, turned obstinately away from\nhim, and said to the Moon, \u2018What must I do with that poor devil, who has\nno estate at all?\u2019 Then al-Dabar\u00e2n gathered together his \u1e32il\u00e2\u1e63 (a\nconstellation in the neighbourhood of al-Dabar\u00e2n), and thus gained\npossession of an estate. And now he is constantly following after the\nPleiades, driving the \u1e32il\u00e2\u1e63 before him as a wedding-present.\u2019[39] \u2018The\nconstellation Capricorn killed the Bear (na\u02bfsh), and therefore the\ndaughters of the latter (bin\u00e2t na\u02bfsh) encircle him, seeking vengeance\nfor their slain father.\u2019 \u2018Suheyl gave the female star al-Jauz\u00e2 a blow;\nthe latter returned it and threw him down where he now lies; but he then\ntook his sword and cut his adversary in pieces.\u2019 \u2018The southern Sirius\n(al-Shi\u02bfra al-yam\u00e2n\u00eeyy\u00e2) was walking with her sister the northern Sirius\n(al-Shi\u02bfra al-sh\u00e2m\u00eeyy\u00e2); the latter parted company and crossed the Milky\nWay, whence her name (al-Shi\u02bfra al-\u02bfab\u00fbr). Her sister, seeing this,\nbegan to weep for the separation, and her eyes dropped tears; therefore\nshe is called the Wet-eyed (al-\u0121umey\u1e63\u00e2).\u2019[40] The existence of similar\nHebrew myths may be inferred from the names of constellations in the\nBook of Job (XXXVIII. 31, 32), especially from the Fool (kes\u00eel, Orion)\nbound to heaven.[41] Are not these genuine Nomads\u2019 myths, produced\nthrough contemplation of the constellations and their relations to one\nanother?\n\nIn conclusion, I must observe that in many passages, especially of the\nlater chapters, a fuller citation of literary apparatus would have been\ndesirable. The want of this is to be ascribed in part to the peculiar\ndesign of the book, and in part to the deficiency of aid from libraries\nfor the exegetical department in my dwelling-place.\n\n\n\n\n MYTHOLOGY AMONG THE HEBREWS.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n _ON HEBREW MYTHOLOGY._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. At the very foundation of the investigations to which this book is\ndevoted, we find ourselves in opposition to a wide-spread assumption:\nthat in regard to Mythology nations may be divided into two classes,\nMythological and Unmythological, or in other words, those which have had\na natural gift for creating Myths, and those whose intellectual capacity\nnever sufficed for this end. It is therefore desirable to lay down\nclearly our position in regard to this assumption, before we advance to\nthe proper subject of our studies.\n\nThe Myth is the result of a purely psychological operation, and is,\ntogether with language, the oldest act of the human mind. This has been\nshown conclusively by the modern school of mythologists who are also\npsychologists. Assuming then, what can scarcely be called in question,\nthat the same psychological laws rule the intellectual activity of\nmankind without distinction of race, we cannot _a priori_ assume that\nthe capacity for forming myths can be given or withheld according to\nethnological categories. As there is only one physiology, and every race\nof mankind under the influence of certain conditions produces the same\nphysiological functions in accordance with physiological laws, so it is\nalso with the psychological functions, given the stimulus necessary to\ntheir production. And this stimulus acts upon mankind everywhere alike.\nFor it is clearly proved that the Myth tells of the operations of\nnature, and is the mode of expressing the perception which man at the\nearliest stage of his intellectual life has of these operations and\nphenomena. These form the substance of the Myth. Consequently, wherever\nthey act as attractions to the youthful human mind, the external\nconditions of the rise of Mythology are present. Not unjustly,\ntherefore, it seems to me, has a recent psychologist spoken of the\n\u2018Universal Presence and the Uniformity\u2019 of myths.[42] Undoubtedly the\ndirection of the myth will vary with the relation of natural phenomena\nto mankind; the myth will take one direction where man greets the sun as\na friendly element, and another where the sun meets him as a hostile\npower; and in the rainless region the rain cannot act the same part in\nMythology which it plays in the rainy parts of the earth. The manners\nand usages of men must also exercise a modifying influence on the\nsubject and the direction of the Myth. As in the course of our further\ninquiries we shall recur to this point, I will here only refer to one\nexample of the latter. It is well known that in the Aryan mythology,\n\u2018the milking of cows\u2019 is a frequently recurring expression for the\nshining of the sun, or as some say for the rain. In tribes which do not\nmilk their cows, like some Negro peoples,[43] or the American natives,\nthis mythical expression can of course not arise.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. There are two points of view, from which the Mythical faculty has\nbeen denied to certain sections of the human race\u2014on the one side a\n_linguistic_, on the other an _ethnological_. As to the first, we must\nespecially name Bleek, the distinguished investigator of the South\nAfrican languages, who, in the introduction to his work on the Story of\nReynard the Fox in South Africa, makes the remark that a mythological\ngenius is peculiar to nations in whose languages a distinction of gender\nin nouns finds expression, whereas those whose languages possess no\nformal distinction of gender in nouns, have no proper mythology, but\ntheir religion stands on that original stage which is the starting-point\nof all human religion, namely that of the cultus of their ancestors.[44]\nIt is obvious that this learned linguist\u2019s distinction involves a\nconfusion of Myth and Religion, which we shall find in the course of our\nsubsequent investigations to be untenable. At present we will disregard\nthis point, and only refer to the mythologies of the Finnish-Ugrian\nnations\u2014peoples whose languages do not indicate any distinction of\ngender in their nouns. Or can it be said that the substance of the epos\nof Kalevala is not proper mythology? To be sure, in nations whose mind\nnever evolved the category of grammatical gender in their languages, the\nmyth will take such a direction as will give to the sexual idea, so\ncharming a feature in the Aryan mythology, much less prominence. For the\nmode of conception which is conveyed by the distinction of \u2018_die_ Sonne\u2019\nand \u2018_der_ Mond,\u2019 or \u2018_hic_ sol\u2019 and \u2018_haec_ luna,\u2019 cannot arise where\nthis distinction is not made. But the figures of a mythology not only\nvary as to sex and genealogy, but act also; they are busy, they fight\nand kill, and the story of these actions and fights is quite independent\nof the gender-idea in language. Stories of them, consequently, which we\ncall Myths, may exist even where the genius of language has opposed the\ndistinction of gender.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. The second point of view, from which some have denied to a section\nof the human race the faculty and tendency to form myths, is\n_ethnological_. Either the Semites in general or the Hebrews specially\nfell a sacrifice to this view. The exclusion of the Semites from the\ndomain of Mythology is announced most emphatically by the ingenious\nmember of the French Academy, Ernest Renan, in the words, \u2018Les S\u00e9mites\nn'ont jamais eu de mythologie.\u2019[45] This arbitrary assertion is deduced\nfrom a scheme of race-psychology invented by Renan himself, which at the\nfirst glance seems so natural and sounds so plausible when described\nwith all the elegance of style of which he is master, that it has become\nan incontestable scientific dogma to a large proportion of the\nprofessional world\u2014for even the territory of science is sometimes\ndominated by mere dogmas\u2014and is treated by learned and cultivated people\nnot specially engaged in this study as an actual axiom in the\nconsideration of race-peculiarities.[46] The foundation of this scheme\nis the idea that in their views of the world, the Aryans start from\nmultiplicity, the Semites from unity; and not only in their conception\nof the world, but also in politics and art. On intellectual ground,\ntherefore, the former create mythology, polytheism, science, which is\nonly possible through discursive observation of natural phenomena; the\nlatter create monotheism, (\u2018the desert is monotheistic,\u2019 says Renan),\nand have therefore neither mythology nor science. \u2018If it is difficult,\u2019\njustly observes Waitz, \u2018to estimate the capability of single individuals\nwell known to us, it is a far more dubious task to gauge the\nintellectual gifts of whole nations and races. It seems scarcely\npossible to find available standards for the purpose, and consequently\nthe judgment is almost always found to be very much founded on personal\nimpressions. The various nations stand at various times on very\ndifferent stages of development, and if only actual performances permit\na safe induction as to the measure of existing capabilities, then this\nmeasure itself seems not to remain the same in the same nation through\nthe course of time, but to vary within very wide limits, especially if\nwe are to assume in all cases that a state of original savageness\npreceded civilisation.\u2019[47] In fact, the words of this cautious\npsychologist apply admirably to Renan\u2019s scheme of race-psychology; for\nhistory is just what that scheme disregards. He does not observe that\nPolytheism and Monotheism are two stages of development in the history\nof religious thought, and that the latter does not spring up\nspontaneously,[48] without being preceded by the former stage, and that\nPolytheism itself is preceded by a preliminary stage, that of the\nmythological view of the world, which is in itself not yet a religion,\nbut prepares the way for the rise of religion.\n\nTo form some idea of the arbitrariness of schemes founded upon some\nuniversal characteristics, we have only to glance over the literature\nwhich sprang up as soon as Renan\u2019s dictum was uttered, either to refute\nit, or to work his hypothesis still further\u2014a regular host of\ndissertations fighting on this side or on that.[49] On reading these, we\nsee clearly how worthless such clever fancies are, that enable one to\nembrace with a stroke of the pen a domain which geographically fills\nmore than half of the inhabited world, and chronologically stretches\nfrom the highest antiquity down to the most recent time. For even\nRenan\u2019s antagonists have fallen into his radical error: they have taken\none-sided schemes and characteristics, only _different_ ones from\nRenan\u2019s. How passive and elastic these schemes are, shall be shown by an\nexample of some importance, which will convince us that the inferences\ndrawn from ethnological characteristics are never anything higher than\narbitrary sleight-of-hand, which any investigator can manipulate to his\nown purpose. To this end we will place side by side the inferences which\nRenan has tacked on to his hypothesis, and a talented German\u2019s\nconclusions, which also essentially take Renan\u2019s basis as the correct\nstarting-point. We speak of Lange, who also starts from the principle\nthat the Semites grasp natural phenomena in combination, the Aryans in\nmultiplicity, and that therefore the former naturally incline towards\nMonotheism, and the latter towards Polytheism. But let us see to what\nwindings and deductions this dogma leads on both sides. We hear Renan\nsay: \u2018Or la conception de la multiplicit\u00e9 dans l\u2019univers, c\u2019est le\npolyth\u00e9isme chez les peuples enfants; c\u2019est la science chez les peuples\narriv\u00e9s \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e2ge m\u00fbr.\u2019[50] Quite the contrary is affirmed by the German\nhistorian of Materialism, who says: \u2018When the heathen sees gods\neverywhere, and has accustomed himself to regard every separate\noperation of nature as the domain of a special demonic action, he throws\nin the way of a materialistic explanation difficulties a thousandfold,\nlike the offices in the Divine household.... But Monotheism here stands\nin a very different relation to science.\u2019 \u2018If a uniform mode of work on\na large scale is attributed to the one God, the mutual connexion of\nthings in their origin and action becomes not only a possible, but even\na necessary consequence of the assumption. For if I saw a thousand and\nagain a thousand wheels in motion, and believed them to be all driven by\none agent, then I should have to conclude that it was a piece of\nmachinery, the minutest portion of which had its movement absolutely\ndetermined by the plan of the whole.\u2019 [51] \u2018The fact that Isl\u00e2m is the\nreligion in which that advancement of the study of nature, which we\nattribute to the monotheistic principle, shows itself most clearly, is\nconnected with the peculiar talents of the Arabs, ... but also\nundoubtedly with the circumstance that Mohammed\u2019s monotheism was the\nseverest of all.\u2019[52] Auguste Comte also draws the same inferences from\nthe tendency of Monotheism to develop a scientific conception of the\nworld, and makes Monotheism and Scientific treatment exert a reciprocal\ninfluence on each other.[53] To which of these opposite deductions from\nthe same premisses shall we hold? \u2018Which is right?\u2019 every educated man\nwill ask, and immediately infer the inadequacy of such general\ncharacterisations, and the wide room thereby opened to arbitrariness and\nerror, in case it should be attempted to erect upon them a history of\ncivilisation or an ethnology.\n\nNow this foundation is exactly that on which Renan\u2019s assumption of the\nabsence of mythology from the Semites rests\u2014an assumption which can by\nno means be admitted, first, because it is unhistorical; and secondly,\nbecause it would necessarily follow from it that race-distinctions\ndifferentiate the psychological bases of intellectual activity. \u2018The\nSemites cannot form a myth,\u2019 is a proposition the possibility of which\ncould be allowed only if such an assertion as \u2018This or that race has no\ndigestive power, or no generative power,\u2019 could be treated otherwise\nthan as an _a priori_ absurdity. But it is even more remarkable that\nRenan, notwithstanding his conviction of the \u2018uniform psychological\nconstitution of the human race,\u2019 in which he finds the justification of\na common story of the Deluge springing up everywhere without\nborrowing,[54] and although he finds the gaps in the chronology of the\nantediluvian period of the Biblical history filled up, \u2018par des noms\nd\u2019anciens h\u00e9ros, et peut-\u00eatre de divinit\u00e9s qu'on retrouve chez les\nautres peuples s\u00e9mitiques,\u2019[55] still speaks of the possibility, indeed\nof the necessity, that the Semitic race should be destitute of myths.\n\nRenan\u2019s hypothesis had to encounter many a hard battle soon after its\npublication. The theologians were highly pleased at what was said about\nthe monotheistic tendency of Semitism, but thought it blasphemy for\nRenan to find in Monotheism _le minimum de religion_ and in Polytheism a\nhigher and more civilised stage of religion. And philologists,\nhistorians and philosophers assailed the foundations of Renan\u2019s pile.\nSteinthal subjects the notion introduced by Renan, of a monotheistic\n_instinct_, to acute psychological criticism. Max M\u00fcller does the same,\nand points to the history of the Hebrews and the other Semites, to\nresolve the dreams of Semitic Monotheism into their nullity. Abraham\nGeiger and Salomon Munk (Renan\u2019s successor in the chair of the _Coll\u00e9ge\nde France_) wish to limit to the Hebrew nation the assertion of Semitic\nMonotheism. Yet what is said about Mythology is not much objected to by\nany of these critics (with the exception of Steinthal). Indeed, one of\nthe pioneers of modern Comparative Mythology, while combating the\nmonotheistic instinct, takes up a position on the mythological question\nnot very far from Renan\u2019s own: \u2018What is peculiar to the Aryan race is\ntheir mythological phraseology, superadded to their polytheism; what is\npeculiar to the Semitic race is their belief in a national god\u2014in a god\nchosen by his people, as his people had been chosen by him.\u2019[56]\n\nMythological science has at the present day ceased to hold fast to the\ndivisions of race in relation to the formation of myths. At least it has\nacted so in relation to that class of nations which, though not\nexhibiting a single race or several closely connected races, has (_faute\nde mieux_) been termed the _Turanian_\u2014a purely negative designation,\nwhich only asserts its members to be neither Semites nor Aryans. Max\nM\u00fcller himself wishes to see the Turanian mythology investigated by the\nsame method which is employed in the Aryan; and he is not shaken by the\nresult, which exhibits a striking identity between Aryan and Turanian\nmyths. He is not shaken even by consideration of the psychological\nforce, which must be taken into account in the first instance in the\ncriticism and valuation of myths. \u2018If people cannot bring themselves to\nbelieve in solar and celestial myths among the Hind\u00fbs and Greeks,\u2019 says\nthis leading investigator, \u2018let them study the folk-lore of the\n_Semitic_ and Turanian races. I know there is, on the part of some of\nour most distinguished scholars, the same objection against comparing\nAryan to non-Aryan myths, as there is against any attempt to explain the\nfeatures of Sanskrit or Greek by a reference to Finnish or Bask. In one\nsense that objection is well founded, for nothing would create greater\nconfusion than to ignore the genealogical principle as the only safe one\nin a scientific classification of languages, of myths, and even of\ncustoms. We must first classify our myths and legends, as we classify\nour languages and dialects.... But there is in a comparative study of\nlanguages and myths not only a philological, but also a philosophical\nand more particularly a psychological interest, and though even in this\nmore general study of mankind the frontiers of language and race ought\nnever to disappear, yet they can no longer be allowed to narrow or\nintercept our view.\u2019[57] Thus M\u00fcller also lays especial stress upon the\npsychological point of view, and, whatever he concedes to\nrace-distinctions, still takes for granted the universality of the\nformation of myths as a psychological postulate. He exhibits, however,\nthe application of his principle to the Turanian only in concrete\nexamples. The Semitic, which, as we saw above, cannot be excluded in\nreference to the universality of the formation of myths, is left out\naltogether. Yet M\u00fcller appears in respect of the Semitic to have passed\nbeyond the position on which he stood in 1860, when writing his essay\n\u2018Semitic Monotheism.\u2019[58] Advancing in the footsteps of the master, a\nrecent American mythologist, John Fiske, has drawn the Turanian into the\ndomain of comparative mythology, and worked out a portion of the\nAmerican stories collected by Brinton,[59] according to the laws of the\nnew method,[60] while the German Schirren, and also Gerland less\ncompletely, had already subjected the Polynesian myths to a similar\ntreatment.[61]\n\nThis circumstance, that the stories of the so-called Turanian humanity\nlend themselves to the comparative method of investigation quite as\neasily as the legendary treasure of the Aryan nations, is a proof how\ncommon to all mankind is the mythological capacity, how false it is to\nfollow ethnological categories and assign it to one race and deny it to\nanother; and on the other hand, how the subject-matter, the perception\nof which forms the ground-work of the oldest mythology, is everywhere\nthe same\u2014the phenomena of nature and the contests of alternating\nelements. For very many and various races, incapable as yet of\nlinguistic classification, endowed with the most diverse physical\nconstitutions, inhabiting the most differing climates from the highest\nnorthern to the furthest southern latitudes, and speaking languages the\nmost incongruous, have taken refuge in the vast unlimited house of\nTuranism, until legitimate parents are found for them. Turanism is\ntherefore the best test of the controverted universality of mythological\ncapacity. There is then no tenable reason why, for the sake of\nfair-sounding but meaningless distinctions, we should introduce the\nSemites into history with the loss of a nose, as it were, and interpret\nthe history of the intellectual development of that race by a principle\nwhich essentially proclaims that the Semites were not born into life as\ninfants, and never saw the sunlight till they were men, or even old men.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. Such reflections may have determined the French Assyriologist\nFran\u00e7ois Lenormant quite recently, to claim mythology for the Semitic\nrace also; although in so doing he does not mention the Hebrews at\nall.[62] For, notwithstanding the alluring mythological subject-matter\ndeposited in the literature of its traditions, the Hebrew nation has\nalways been a stepchild of mythological inquiry, and still awaits an\ninvestigator to do full justice to it. It is easy to be understood that\na mistaken religious interest, which identified itself with the Biblical\nliterature and warned off mythological inquiry with an energetic _Noli\nme tangere_, sharpened, it may be, with a dose of canonical or\nuncanonical excommunication, blockaded the passage of investigation on\nthis path. I call it a _mistaken_ interest, because the true interests\nof religion are advanced, not imperilled, by the results of science.\nDisregarding men of the calibre of Nork and a few other inferior\ndisciples of the school of Creuzer, we can affirm that, with the\nexception of a few essays, even the freest and most earnest interpreters\nof the Bible have examined, and do still examine, the Biblical books\nonly as products of literature, bringing to light valuable results as to\nthe times and tendencies of the original composition and subsequent\nediting of the several parts of the Canon. But on the origin and\nsignificance of the persons themselves who figure in the Biblical\nstories, even the freest interpreters are silent, as if the Hebrews were\na people quite apart, and not to be measured by the measure of History\nand Psychology.\n\nEven those who are willing to know something of Semitic myths in general\nresist the assumption of Hebrew myths. No one has defined his position\non this point so unambiguously as Baron Bunsen, who has thought so much\nand so profoundly on religious matters. It is really extraordinary that\nthis immortal man, who exerted so stimulating an influence on the\nstudies of his young friend Max M\u00fcller, and who welcomed the latter\u2019s\npioneer-essay \u2018Comparative Mythology\u2019 with \u2018especial pleasure\u2019 at the\n\u2018pure popular poetry of the feeling for nature,\u2019 exhibited so little\ncomprehension of the aims of the new direction given to mythological\nstudies by M\u00fcller. His view of the connexion of the Aryan mass of\nmythology is consequently very confused. This is especially to be\nregretted, because the displacement of the true point of view in\nmythical speculation, and the continual concessions to Creuzer and\nSchelling, hindered him from making permanently useful the philosophical\nlabour expended on the understanding of the Egyptian theology. Bunsen\ndid not separate Religion from Myths, and consequently he sees what he\ncalls Consciousness of a God in a genealogised and systematised\nMythology. It is therefore not surprising that he advanced no further\nthan his predecessors in relation to the Hebrew myths. He speaks of the\n\u2018spirit of the Jewish people, historically penetrated through and\nthrough with aversion to mythology,\u2019[63] and concentrates his thoughts\non this theme in the sixth, seventh, and eighth of the theses in which\nhe exhibits the relation of the Egyptian mythology to the Asiatic.\nAccording to these, \u2018the Bible has no Mythology; it is the grand,\nmomentous, and fortunate self-denial of Judaism to possess none.\u2019 As if\na myth\u2014which Bunsen himself had called \u2018_pure_ popular poetry of the\nfeeling for nature\u2019\u2014were an abomination, a defilement of the human mind,\na sinful act voluntarily performed, which the Elect can _deny\nthemselves_! On the other hand, \u2018the national sentiment mirrored in\nAbraham, Moses, and the primeval history generally from the Creation to\nthe Deluge, and the expression of it, are rooted in the mythological\nlife of the East in the earliest times,\u2019 and \u2018in the long period from\nJoseph to Moses, there have been interwoven with the life and actions of\nthis greatest and most influential of all the men of the first age\n[Abraham] and the history of his son and grandson, many ancient\ntraditions from the mythology of those tribes from whose savage natural\nlife the Hebrews were extracted, to their own good and that of mankind\nand for higher ends.\u2019[64] According to this there are Myths belonging to\nthe Hebrews, but not Hebrew Myths\u2014only borrowed ones, obtained from\n\u2018Primeval Asia.\u2019\n\nI have exhibited Bunsen\u2019s position at some length, because, with all his\nadvanced ideas on the essence and significance of Mythology, he still to\nthis day dominates the minds of those who, while admitting the\npossibility of Semitic Mythology, are up in arms against the existence\nof Hebrew myths.\n\n\n\u00a7 5. Nevertheless, I hope it is clear from the above that Hebrew\nmythology is _a priori_ possible. The following chapters will give\noccasion to prove in what this existence consists. It will then appear\nthat the Hebrew myths, necessarily owing their existence to the same\npsychological operation as the Aryan or the so-called Turanian, must\nconsequently have the same original signification as these. Hence the\nfigures of Hebrew mythology denote the very natural phenomena whose\nappellations lie before us in those figures\u2019 names. These names,\nhowever, are _not symbolic_,[65] but are antiquated appellatives of the\nnatural phenomena denoted by them, just as the words, _Sun_, _Moon_,\n_Rain_, &c. This must be distinctly proclaimed, as some who\nmisunderstand the modern method of Mythology pervert it in a false and\nantiquated way by the introduction of symbolism.\n\nWe must also beware of confounding the original Myth with Religion or,\nstill worse, with the Consciousness of God. This confusion is the source\nof most of the erroneous estimates and notions of Mythology, which even\nthe latest methods of investigating myths has not entirely removed. The\nvery earliest activity of the human intellect can only work upon what\nfalls immediately under the cognisance of the senses, and upon what\nthrough its frequency and the regularity of its return prompts men most\nreadily to speech. Such things are the daily natural phenomena, the\nchange of light and darkness, of rain and sunshine, and all that\naccompanies these changes. What primitive man spoke on these things, is\nthe Myth. It is psychologically impossible that the earliest activity of\nthe human mind should have been anything else but this. We cannot speak\nof a consciousness of God, a _sensus numinis_, as existing in the\nearliest Mythological period. Not till later, when some process in the\nhistory of language gives the ancient myths a new direction, do they\nturn into either History or Religion. The latter always arises out of\nthe materials of Mythology, and then finds its historical task to be to\nwork itself upwards into independence. Then, while the mythology out of\nwhich it sprang is growing less and less intelligible, and therefore\nalso less and less expressive, Religion must in the progress of its\ndevelopment sever its connexion with Mythology, and unite itself with\nthe scientific consciousness, which now occupies the place of the\nmythological.\n\nHow Mythology becomes Religion is shown most clearly by _Dualism_.\nNothing can be less correct than the belief that the dualistic system of\nreligion had from its very origin an ethical meaning. This, as well as\nthe limitation of Dualism to Ir\u00e2n and Babylon,[66] is refuted by the\nfrequent occurrence of the dualistic conception of the world among the\nmost various savage peoples.[67] The ethical significance of Dualism is\ndecidedly secondary; it is the form of development of the main theme of\nall mythology, the relation of light to darkness, proper to a higher\nstage of culture. Many mythological fancies, and especially the Sun\u2019s\nvoyage by ship in the nether world, became religious eschatological\nideas when the mythical meaning itself was lost from the mind, and gave\nrise to new ideas of life in the nether world, resurrection, ascent to\nheaven, &c.; this was first established in reference to the old Egyptian\nmythology.[68] So also Dualism as it appears in Ir\u00e2n is a myth that has\ntaken an ethical sense. This is best seen in the facts that the northern\nAlgonquins, with whom Dualism is almost as fixed a principle as in Ir\u00e2n,\ncall the good and evil principles respectively Sun and Moon, and that\namong the Hurons the Evil principle is the grand-mother of the Good:[69]\nthe Night is the mother or grand-mother, or, in general, the ancestress\nof the Day. Here religious dualism has not quite put off the character\nof its origin in Mythology. On the other hand, the Iranic system at a\nvery early age (that of the Avesta) elevated Dualism into the region of\npure morals, and yet at a later (the epic period) formed out of the\noriginal myth the localised story of the war of Zohak against\nFer\u00eed\u00fbn.[70]\n\nThat Dualism as a religious conception is a further development of the\nmyth, and not first excited by the moral problem of the strife of the\ngood against the evil, becomes evident also from the consideration of a\npeculiar form of dualistic religion which we find in many Semitic\nnations. We here frequently find a deity regarded as male, who has a\ncorresponding female to represent, as it were, the reverse side of the\nsame natural force, and then the two forces unite to produce a natural\nphenomenon. So, for instance, Sun and Earth, Baal and Mylitta, the\nfactors of procreation. This likewise is a dualistic tendency, in which\nhowever the two deities are not represented as mutually hostile. We are\njustified in placing this phenomenon in the chapter on Dualism, because\ntwo such deities in the course of history are often joined together into\none.[71] Now this side of dualistic religion can be traced back only to\nMythology as its source and point of departure. The Hebrew myth of Judah\nand Tamar, which we shall consider further on (Chap. V., \u00a7 14), exhibits\na mythical prototype of such dualistic views of religion.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 1:\n\n Especially Max M\u00fcller\u2019s essay on _Comparative Mythology_ (_Chips_\n etc., II. 1), and the ninth in the second series of his _Lectures on\n the Science of Language_; and Cox\u2019s introductions to his _Manual of\n Mythology_, _Tales of the Gods and Heroes_, and _Tales of Thebes and\n Argos_.\n\nFootnote 2:\n\n Both in England and in France the attempt has been made with much\n taste to introduce the results of comparative mythology in the\n instruction of youth; in England by Rev. G.W. Cox in his _Tales of the\n Gods and Heroes_, _Tales of Thebes and Argos_, _Tales from Greek\n Mythology_, _Manual of Mythology in the form of question and answer_,\n 1867, and _Tales of Ancient Greece_, 1870, the last two of which have\n just been translated into Hungarian, and published by the Franklin\n Society; in France by Baudry and Delerot (Paris 1872). Still more\n recently the results of comparative mythology have also been\n summarised in two excellent books for children by Edward Clodd, _The\n Childhood of the World: a simple account of Man in Early Times_, 1873,\n and _The Childhood of Religion; embracing a simple account of the\n birth and growth of Myths and Legends_, 1875.\n\nFootnote 3:\n\n This psychological uniformity of all races of men is independent of\n the question of the monogenetic or polygenetic origin of races. The\n psychological uniformity of different races is especially conspicuous\n when we observe and compare individuals of the separate races in\n infancy, when the distinctions produced by history, education,\n instruction, etc., are not yet present (see Frohschammer, _Das\n Christenthum und die moderne Naturwissenschaft_, Vienna 1868, p. 208.)\n When we are considering the growth of mankind in general, the stage\n when myths are created corresponds to the infancy of the individual.\n\nFootnote 4:\n\n _Das Best\u00e4ndige in den Menschenrassen und die Spielweise ihrer\n Ver\u00e4nderlichkeit_, Berlin 1868, p. 78.\n\nFootnote 5:\n\n Fran\u00e7ois Lenormant, _Essai sur la Propagation de l\u2019Alphabet ph\u00e9nicien\n dans l\u2019ancien monde_, Vol. I. (2nd ed., Paris 1875), p. 17.\n\nFootnote 6:\n\n Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, I. 6.\n\nFootnote 7:\n\n On these two see Pfleiderer, _Die Religion, ihr Wesen und ihre\n Geschichte_, II. 8.\n\nFootnote 8:\n\n The title is 'Conf\u00e9rence de la Fable avec l\u2019Histoire sainte, o\u00f9 l\u2019on\n voit que les grandes fables, le culte et les myst\u00e8res du paganisme ne\n sont que des copies alt\u00e9r\u00e9es des histoires, des usages et des\n traditions des H\u00e9breux.'\n\nFootnote 9:\n\n Edward Wilton in the _Journal of Sacred Literature_, 1849, II. 374\n _et seq._\n\nFootnote 10:\n\n Dr. Vollmer\u2019s _W\u00f6rterbuch der Mythologie aller V\u00f6lker_, newly revised\n by Dr. W. Binder, with an Introduction to Mythological Science by Dr.\n Johannes Minckwitz, 3rd ed., Stuttgart 1874.\n\nFootnote 11:\n\n See the Augsburg _Allgemeine Zeitung_, 1875, no. 169, p. 2657.\n\nFootnote 12:\n\n _Primitive Culture_, I. 22.\n\nFootnote 13:\n\n See Virchow in the _Monatsbericht der k\u00f6nigl. preuss. Akademie der\n Wissenschaften_, January 1875, p. 11.\n\nFootnote 14:\n\n _Origin of Civilisation_, 3rd ed., p. 330, quoting Sibree\u2019s\n _Madagascar and its People_, p. 396.\n\nFootnote 15:\n\n _Einleitung in die Philosophie der Mythologie_, pp. 62, 63. This is\n the idea to which Max M\u00fcller refers in noticing the lectures of the\n philosopher of Berlin, in his _Introduction to the Science of\n Religion_, p. 145.\n\nFootnote 16:\n\n See his _Popul\u00e4re Aufs\u00e4tze aus dem Alterthum, vorzugsweise zur Ethik\n und Religion der Griechen_, second edition, Leipzig 1875, especially\n p. 272 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 17:\n\n Flach, _Das System der Hesiod. Kosmogonie_, Leipzig 1874; see\n _Literar. Centralblatt_, 1875, no. 7.\n\nFootnote 18:\n\n _Rude Stone Monuments in all Countries_, p. 32, note 2.\n\nFootnote 19:\n\n _The Chaldean Account of Genesis_, p. 302.\n\nFootnote 20:\n\n Sayce in the _Academy_, 1875, p. 586.\n\nFootnote 21:\n\n The _Academy_, 1875, no. 184, p. 496. The promoters of the\n _Theological Translation Fund_, by whom Kuenen\u2019s _Religion of Israel_\n was published, Dr. J. Muir of Edinburgh, who wrote some letters to the\n _Scotsman_ on the Dutch Theology, and to a certain extent Bishop\n Colenso, besides many others who have not avowed their views so\n publicly, indicate the progress of opinion in England.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 22:\n\n See _Literar. Centralblatt_, 1875, no. 49, p. 157.\n\nFootnote 23:\n\n _Biblische Mythologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments_, 2 vols.,\n Stuttgart 1842; _Etymologisch-symbolisch-mythologisches Realw\u00f6rterbuch\n f\u00fcr Bibelforscher, Arch\u00e4ologen und bildende K\u00fcnstler_, 4 vols.,\n Stuttgart 1843\u20135.\n\nFootnote 24:\n\n I have not succeeded in obtaining a sight of Schwenk\u2019s _Mythologie der\n Semiten_, published in 1849; but Bunsen\u2019s condemnation of it in\n _Egypt\u2019s Place in Universal History_, IV. p. 363, made me less anxious\n to get it.\n\nFootnote 25:\n\n _Naturgeschichte der Sage. R\u00fcckf\u00fchrung aller religi\u00f6sen Ideen, Sagen,\n Systeme auf ihren gemeinsamen Stammbaum und ihre letzte Wurzel_, 2\n vols., Munich 1864\u20135.\n\nFootnote 26:\n\n In Vol. II. of his _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie und\n Sprachwissenschaft_, translated and appended to this volume.\n\nFootnote 27:\n\n _Der Semitismus_, in _Zeitsch. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie etc._, 1875,\n VIII. 339\u2013340.\n\nFootnote 28:\n\n It would be unfair not to mention the Dutch Professor Tiele as a\n worker on this field. In his _Vergelijkende Geschiedenis der oude\n godsdiensten_, Vol. I.: _De egyptische en mesopotamische godsdiensten_\n (Amsterdam 1872) he has occasionally inserted explanations of Hebrew\n myths, to which I have referred at the proper places.\n\nFootnote 29:\n\n II. 421 _et seq._; see his _Rivista Europea_, year VI. II. 587. Cf.\n his review of the German edition of this work in the _Bollettino\n italiano degli studj orientali_, 1876, I. 169\u2013172.\n\nFootnote 30:\n\n In reference to this I may refer to the eloquent expressions of\n Steinthal in his lecture _Mythos und Religion_, p. 28 (in Virchow and\n Holtzendorff\u2019s _Sammlung gemeinverst\u00e4ndlicher Vortr\u00e4ge_, Bd. V. Heft\n 97).\n\nFootnote 31:\n\n _Mythologie der Ebr\u00e4er in ihrem Zusammenhange mit den Mythologien der\n Indogermanen und der \u00c6gypter._ Nordhausen 1876.\n\nFootnote 32:\n\n _Ausland_, 1874, p. 961 _et seq._, 1001 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 33:\n\n The above-named work was published immediately after the conclusion of\n this Introduction.\n\nFootnote 34:\n\n _Die Erzv\u00e4ter der Menschheit: ein Beitrag zur Grundlegung einer\n hebr\u00e4ischen Alterthumswissenschaft._ Leipzig, Fues 1875.\n\nFootnote 35:\n\n Ibn Ya\u02bf\u00eesh\u2019s Commentary on the Mufa\u1e63\u1e63al, p. 74 (of the edition now\n being published by Dr. Jahn of Berlin). See _Fables_ de Loqman le Sage\n (\u00e9d. D\u00e9renbourg), Introduction, p. 7.\n\nFootnote 36:\n\n I may refer on this point to Von Grutschmid\u2019s excellent critique on\n Bunsen\u2019s attempt to explain Athene as Semitic, in the former\u2019s\n _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des alten Orients_, Leipzig 1858, p. 46.\n\nFootnote 37:\n\n Stade (_Morgenl\u00e4ndische Forschungen_, p. 232) justly insists on the\n good Hebrew character of the names occurring in the Hebrew stories,\n even against the false supposition of the original Aramaic character\n of the Hebrew people.\n\nFootnote 38:\n\n _Zeitsch. d. D.M.G._, 1871, XXV. 139; see Lepsius, _Einleitung zur\n Chronologie der alten \u00c6gypten_, I. 326.\n\nFootnote 39:\n\n See Ibn Ya\u02bf\u00eesh\u2019s Commentary on the Mufa\u1e63\u1e63al of Zamachshar\u00ee, p. 47, in\n which the name of the constellation al-\u02bfAyy\u00fb\u1e33 (Auriga, \u2018The Hinderer\u2019)\n is imported into this story, as hindering al-Dabar\u00e2n from coming up\n with his beloved.\n\nFootnote 40:\n\n al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee, Majma\u02bf al-amth\u00e2l (ed. of B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33), II. 209.\n\nFootnote 41:\n\n See N\u00f6ldeke in Schenkel\u2019s _Bibellexikon_, 2nd ed. IV. 370.\n\nFootnote 42:\n\n _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft_, 1869, VI.\n\nFootnote 43:\n\n Theodor Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, II. 85.\n\nFootnote 44:\n\n W.H.I. Bleek, _Reynard the Fox in South Africa_, 1864, pp. xx-xxvi.\n See Max M\u00fcller\u2019s _Introduction to the Science of Religion_, London\n 1873, p. 54.\n\nFootnote 45:\n\n _Histoire g\u00e9n\u00e9rale et Syst\u00e8me compar\u00e9 des Langues s\u00e9mitiques_, p. 7.\n\nFootnote 46:\n\n Two instances will suffice to show how Renan\u2019s hypothesis became the\n common property of educated people. It is treated as fully made out,\n both by Roscher, the German political economist, and by Draper, the\n American naturalist and historian of civilisation. The former says:\n \u2018Life in the desert seems to be an especially favourable soil for\n Monotheism. It wants that luxuriant variety of the productive powers\n of nature by which Polytheism was encouraged in remarkably fruitful\n countries, such as India\u2019 (_System der Volkswirthschaft_, 7th ed.,\n Stuttgart 1873, II. 38). The latter: \u2018Polytheistic ideas have always\n been held in repute by the southern European races; the Semitic have\n maintained the unity of God. Perhaps this is due to the fact, as a\n recent author has suggested, that a diversified landscape of mountains\n and valleys, islands, rivers, and gulfs, predisposes man to a belief\n in a multitude of divinities. A vast sandy desert, the illimitable\n ocean, impresses him with an idea of the oneness of God\u2019 (_History of\n Conflict between Religion and Science_, London 1875, p. 70). This view\n has also passed into Peschel\u2019s _V\u00f6lkerkunde_, and Bluntschli also, in\n his lecture on the ancient oriental ideas of God and world in 1861,\n echoed Renan\u2019s hypothesis of 1855.\n\nFootnote 47:\n\n _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, I. 297.\n\nFootnote 48:\n\n On the other side, Renan says (_Hist. g\u00e9n._ 4th ed., p. 497) \u2018Cette\n grande conqu\u00eate (the recognition of Monotheism) ne fut pas pour elle\n (i. e. for the Semitic race) l\u2019effet du progr\u00e8s; ce fut une de ces\n premi\u00e8res aperceptions.\u2019\n\nFootnote 49:\n\n Much of this literature has been unnoticed, as e.g. a late pamphlet by\n L\u00e9on Hugonnet: _La civilisation arabe, d\u00e9fense des peuples s\u00e9mitiques\n en r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 M. Renan_, Geneva 1873.\n\nFootnote 50:\n\n _Histoire g\u00e9n\u00e9rale_, p.\n\nFootnote 51:\n\n _Geschichte des Materialismus_, 1st ed., 1866, p. 77. See 2nd ed.,\n 1873, I. 149.\n\nFootnote 52:\n\n Ib. p. 83. See 2nd ed., p. 152.\n\nFootnote 53:\n\n _Cours de Philosophie Positive_, \u00e9d. Littr\u00e9, Paris 1869, V. 90, 197,\n 324.\n\nFootnote 54:\n\n _Histoire g\u00e9n\u00e9rale_, p. 486: \u2018L\u2019unit\u00e9 de constitution psychologique de\n l\u2019esp\u00e8ce humaine, au moins des grandes races civilis\u00e9es, en vertu de\n laquelle les m\u00eames mythes ont d\u00fb appara\u00eetre parall\u00e8lement sur\n plusieurs points \u00e0 la fois, suffirait, d\u2019ailleurs, pour expliquer les\n analogies qui reposent sur quelque trait g\u00e9n\u00e9ral de la condition de\n l\u2019humanit\u00e9, ou sur quelques-uns de ses instincts les plus profonds.\u2019\n\nFootnote 55:\n\n Ib. p. 27.\n\nFootnote 56:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Chips from a German Workshop_, I. 370.\n\nFootnote 57:\n\n _Introduction to the Science of Religion_, p. 390 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 58:\n\n In _Chips_, &c., I. p. 341.\n\nFootnote 59:\n\n In _The Myths of the New World_, New York 1868. See Steinthal\u2019s\n criticism of this collection in the _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie\n and Sprachwissenschaft_, 1871, Bd. VII.\n\nFootnote 60:\n\n _Myths and Myth-Makers_, Boston 1873, p. 151 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 61:\n\n In the sixth vol. of Waitz\u2019s _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, where I\n obtained information about Schirren\u2019s works.\n\nFootnote 62:\n\n _Les premi\u00e8res civilisations_, Paris 1874, II. 113 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 63:\n\n _Gott in der Geschichte_, I. 353; a passage which, with a large part\n of the volume, is omitted in the greatly abridged English translation.\n\nFootnote 64:\n\n _Aegyptens Stelle in der Weltgeschichte_, V. ii. 18\u201319 (English tr.\n IV. 28\u201329).\n\nFootnote 65:\n\n Even old Plutarch observed in reference to the then favourite\n explanation of the myths _ex ratione physica_: \u0394\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\n \u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd (i.e. of the sun and moon) \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 (Zeus and\n Hera), \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7 \u0394\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f25\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f55\u03bb\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n \u03c3\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd (_Quaestiones Romanae_, 77). See Cicero, _De Nat. Deorum_,\n III. 24: Longe aliter rem se habere, atque hominum opinio sit: eos\n enim, qui dii appellantur, _rerum naturas_ esse, non _figuras deorum_.\n\nFootnote 66:\n\n Spiegel still does this up to a recent date in his _Eranische\n Alterthumskunde_, II. 19.\n\nFootnote 67:\n\n See Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, II. 287 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 68:\n\n The story of Osiris and Typhon _e.g._ originally personified the\n vegetative life of nature and the struggles incident to it, but was\n afterwards transferred to the destinies of the human soul. See Ebers,\n _Durch Gosen zum Sinai_, Leipzig 1872, p. 477.\n\nFootnote 69:\n\n Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, III. 183.\n\nFootnote 70:\n\n See Roth in the _Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenl\u00e4ndischen\n Gesellschaft_, 1848, II. 217; Albrecht Weber, _Akademische Vorlesungen\n \u00fcber indische Literaturgeschichte_, Berlin 1852, p. 35.\n\nFootnote 71:\n\n See Kuenen, _The Religion of Israel_, London 1874, I. 226.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n _SOURCES OF HEBREW MYTHOLOGY._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. If it is now established that we are justified in speaking of a\nHebrew Mythology, in the same sense as of the mythologies of Indians,\nHellenes, Germans, &c., then the question naturally arises, Can we come\nupon the track of those forms of expression and those figures which\ngenerally make up the elements of the Hebrew Myth; and Are these\nelements when found recognisable as elements of myths, i.e. Are they\nexpressions and stories in which the ancient Hebrew, standing on the\nmyth-creating stage of his intellectual development, spoke of the\noperations and changes of Nature? That in the abstract he was as capable\nas the Aryan on the same stage of development of speaking myths, we have\nadmitted in assuming the _universality_ of the formation of myths; and\nof what those expressions exactly consist, and what are the mythical\nfigures which he formed, it will be the business of a subsequent chapter\nto exhibit.\n\nIn this chapter our task will be limited to the discovery of the sources\nwhich we have to estimate by the method of Comparative Mythology, in\norder to discern the various expressions and figures of the Hebrew myth.\nNow both the incitement to the formation of myths and the course of\ndevelopment through which they pass before they are noted down in a\nliterary age and then stiffen and undergo no further change, are based\non psychological operations, the laws of which are not governed by\ncategories of race and ethnology. It is therefore obvious, that for the\nunderstanding of the Hebrew myths we must betake ourselves to the very\nsame class of sources which the mythologist finds fruitful on Aryan\nterritory. Fortunately such sources are open to us on Hebrew ground\nalso. They have, indeed, a less copious stream than those of Aryan\nmythology, but yet suffice to give us a picture of what the ancient\nHebrew on the mythic stage thought and felt, and how he found expression\nin language for these thoughts and feelings. It is true, this\ninvestigation cannot be separated from another closely connected with\nit\u2014what method we must employ to arrive at the germ of the myth hidden\nin these sources. But for the present we must still put off this second\nquestion, and content ourselves with the search for the sources of\nmythical matter. It will, however, not be always possible to avoid an\nindication of the method; and this is the case now with the first of the\nsources which we have to bring forward.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. _a._) We shall have to speak again further on of the question, What\nfactors in the minds of the Hebrew people produced the conception of\nthose _Patriarchs_, whose destinies form the most illustrious portion of\ntheir national historic writing? It will then become clear that this\nPatriarchal character represents only a later historical stratum of\nmythical development, produced by those very factors. Originally the\nnames of the Patriarchs and the actions which are told of them signified\nnothing historical, but only something on the domain of Nature. The\nnames are appellations of physical phenomena, and the actions are\nactions of Nature. For surely we must at the outset come to a clear\nunderstanding on the question, What is the origin of persons like Abram,\nSarah, Jacob and the rest, who fill the Hebrew Patriarchal history?\nwhence, how, and by what psychological law did they enter into the mind\nof the primitive Hebrews? The facile assumption that these persons and\nthe actions with which they are concerned are mere _Fiction_ with no\nexternal foundation, is so cheap and meaningless a way of getting over\nthe difficulties which their existence in poetry presents to the\ninvestigator, that it as impossible to adopt it as to admit the opposite\nequally arbitrary opinion, which makes them historical in the same sense\nas Goethe or Frederick the Great. Certainly they are fictions, if by\nthat we mean that no historical persons correspond to them as human\nindividuals; but by no means in the sense that their origin, or rather\nthe conception of them, has no other foundation but the fancy of the\npoet or writer. In this sense they have actual realities corresponding\nto them\u2014the events and operations of Nature, which are the main-springs\nof mythical language. And it is not conceivable that the oldest\nutterances of the human mind should have begun from anything else but\nfrom the sensations which the operations of Nature aroused in their\nbreasts. As soon as they perceived these, occasion for myths was\npresent; and the myths show how they became fully conscious of the\noperations of Nature.\n\nThe Patriarchal stories are therefore an important source for the\nknowledge of myths. If we loosen stratum after stratum which has been\nformed through the agency of psychological and historical factors over\nthe primitive form of the myth, and have at length penetrated back to\nthe stage at which many of the mythical appellations, through the disuse\nof multifarious synonymous terms, were individualised and personified,\nthen it is easy to pick the primitive germ, the original mythic\nelements, out of the shell in which they had been encased. Hence it\nappears that the most fruitful field for mythological investigation on\nHebrew territory is the Book of GENESIS, the greater part of which\nbrings together the stories which the Hebrew people connected with the\nnames of the Patriarchs.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. _b._) The Patriarchal legends, in such fulness and artistic finish\nas the remains of old Hebrew literature have preserved for us, are a\ndistinguishing characteristic of this literature. Other nations have\nfailed to transform their myths into such a wealth of reports about\ntheir first progenitors. What meagre accounts the Hellenes give of their\nnational ancestors, in comparison with this rich and varied Patriarchal\nhistory! A special peculiarity of the historical development of the\nHebrew people was active here, bringing the _national_ idea into the\nforeground, and exerting its influence in this direction on the\ntransformation of the primitive mythological materials.[72] But instead\nof this, other nations, among whom our above-named example, the richly\nendowed Hellenes, are to be reckoned, have chosen rather to transform\nthe figures of their myths into Gods and godborn Heroes.\n\nThe figures of Gods, which were developed out of Hebrew myths, very\nearly retired into the background. It was partly the Canaanite influence\nto which the Hebrew people very early succumbed, and partly the\nprogressing monotheistic tendency, that allowed no theology consistently\ndeveloped out of mythology to maintain itself for any length of time. Of\nHeroes, however, there is no want in the memory of the Hebrews. In that\nregion as well as elsewhere, the Heroes had originally borne a different\nmeaning and belonged to mythology; and their heroic character is, on the\nHebrew as well as on the Aryan domain, secondary, produced by the\npsychological and linguistic process which caused the natural meaning of\nmythological figures to vanish from the mind.\n\nNow although these Heroes are originally gigantic persons bound to no\ndefinite place or time, yet they are gradually condensed into\nindividuals and regarded as more and more concrete and definite. What is\ntold of them puts off its generality and indefiniteness. They are\nconceived as belonging to certain places where their heroic deeds were\nperformed\u2014in other words, the legends of Heroes are localised. Their\nactivity is assigned to a definite time, they are inserted in a\nchronological frame, in which they take up a definite position as to\ntime. What more natural localisation of the activity of the Heroes could\nthere be than to imagine them living in the same geographical districts\nas those who tell of them? The localisation of heroic legends is always\nenlisted in the service of patriotic feeling. Herakles and Theseus are\n_Greek_ patriots, heroic benefactors of the Grecian people. The\ndetermination of the time when they lived was influenced mainly by the\nendeavour, natural to every civilised nation, to gain a clear,\ncomprehensive, and continuous picture of its own history. But truly\nhistorical memory does not generally go far enough back to explain with\nproper fulness the entire past doings of a nation. The historical\nbeginnings of a people are lost in the mist of indefiniteness and\nuncertainty. What is easier than to fill up this obscure period of\nhistory by telling of the doings of the Heroes? Why, the human temper in\nits pessimistic mood is always inclined to fancy the very oldest age\npeopled with men of gigantic proportions of both body and mind, in\ncomparison with whom the enervate present generation is a mere shadow.\nSo we find the stories of Heroes always at the head of the national\nhistory. The history of the Greek people begins with their heroic age;\nand the obscure period of Hebrew history between the first entrance into\nCanaan and the creation of the Monarchy, the so-called time of the\nJudges, is likewise the frame which must hold the Hebrew heroic legends.\nThe stories of the Hebrew Heroes group themselves round the history of\nthis period. The second important source of knowledge of the materials\nof the Hebrew mythology is accordingly the cycle of stories to be found\nin the canonical Book of Judges. This is the mine of mythology, whose\ntreasures Professor Steinthal has brought to light with such critical\nacuteness in his dissertation on the story of Samson,[73] which breaks\nup entirely new ground. Here for the first\n\ntime the method and results of the modern science of mythology were\nindependently applied to the domain of Hebrew antiquity. It must be\ncalled a happy accident that the mythical character of the Hebrew heroes\ncould be proved by so convincing an example as Shimsh\u00f4n (Samson); for\neven the wildest scepticism cannot doubt that this name is equivalent to\nshemesh, \u2018sun,\u2019 and that this fact gives us an undeniable right to\nmaintain the _solar_ significance of the hero, and to see in his battles\nthe contest of the Sun against darkness and storms.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. _c._) But the Old Testament stories do not cease to be a source for\nmythological investigation exactly where the traditions of Genesis and\nthe Book of Judges are succeeded by really historical accounts. For it\nis an admitted fact that, as soon as ever the myths have lost their\noriginal meaning by the personification of their figures, mythical\ncharacteristics are not limited to their proper domain, but often\nactually attach themselves to historical persons and historical actions.\nAlexander the Great, for example, is a phenomenon whose historical\ncharacter could not be shaken by the very boldest criticism. Yet the\nstory even of Alexander\u2019s acts and fortunes has been forced to bear some\ncharacteristics of the Solar myth, traits which were originally peculiar\nto the Sun-hero, as especially the journey into the realm of\ndarkness.[74] Accordingly, not every phenomenon in the traditional\ncharacteristics of which we discover solar features is mythical, even\nthough, strictly speaking, it can scarcely be classed with history (as\ne.g. William Tell). It is highly erroneous to speak, as is often done,\nof myth and history as two opposites which exclude any third\npossibility.\n\nHowever, there are two points to which we ought to attend when\nconsidering the attachment of mythic elements to historical phenomena.\nFirst, it is usual, as we have just mentioned, to find one or another\nmythical characteristic attached to historical phenomena, as we may\nobserve (to keep on specifically Hebrew ground) in the portraiture of\nthe character of David or of Elijah (see Chap. V. \u00a7 8). The residence of\nthe Hebrews in Egypt, and their exodus thence under the guidance and\ntraining of an enthusiast for the freedom of his tribe, form a series of\nstrictly historical facts, which find confirmation even in the documents\nof ancient Egypt. But the traditional narrative of these events,\nelaborated by the Hebrew people, was involuntarily associated with\ncharacteristics of that Solar myth which forms the oldest mental\nactivity of mankind in general. Thus, for example, the passage through\nthe sea by night is to be compared with the myth of the setting sun,\nwhich travels all night through the sea, and rises again in the morning\non the opposite side. Similarly, we find attached to the picture of the\nlife of Moses, which the Biblical narrative presents with a theocratic\ncolouring, solar characteristics, indeed more specifically features of\nthe myth of Prometheus. These have been clearly exhibited by Steinthal\nin his fine Treatise on the Prometheus-story, to which I will here only\nrefer without reproducing its contents.[75] Secondly, we must consider\nthe converse relation\u2014that historical facts, the names of the agents of\nwhich have not been preserved in the popular mind, may be attached to\nmythical names. We can go back to the time of the Judges for an example\nof this. It is evidently real history that we read of the embittered\ncontests waged by the Hebrews in that age against the Philistines and\nother tribes of Canaan. Remembrance of these contests, in the absence of\nhistorical names, helped itself out by the mythical appellations which,\nafter the individualising of mythical figures, had obtained significance\nas personal names. In the first case the bearers of the names are\nhistorical persons, and the features of the story belong to mythology;\nin the second, history is wedded to mythical names. In both directions,\naccordingly, the Hebrew history treated critically is a source for\nmythological investigation.\n\n\n\u00a7 5. _d._) One of the most reliable, but at the same time most\nhazardous, sources of Hebrew, as of Aryan, mythological investigation is\nthe _language_ itself, and above all, the appellations to which the myth\nis attached. These appellations, which in the process of transformation\nof the original meaning of the myth became personal names, are in their\nproper original sense appellatives; and we have to find the appellative\nsignification in order to establish the mythological character. In this\ninvestigation it is best to follow the method, the use of which in Aryan\nmythology has brought such brilliant results to light. In many\nappellations the appellative sense can be found without much difficulty,\nbeing explicable from the language itself, in our case from the known\ntreasures of the Hebrew tongue. In others the known material of the\nHebrew language refuses its aid, and we must then take refuge in a\ncautious employment of the group of allied languages, i.e. the Semitic\nstock. In this connexion we must never leave out of sight the fact that\nthe treasury of Hebrew words which is contained in the books of the Old\nTestament does not even approximately embrace the wealth of the ancient\nHebrew vocabulary which we are enabled to infer from this fraction. In\nthe proper names much ancient linguistic property is preserved which\noccurs nowhere else. The discovery of the appellative signification of\nmythological proper names consequently does an important service to\nmythological investigation, by finding a tangible starting-point for the\ndetermination of the mythical sense of the root-word in question. But it\ndoes more: it also fills up gaps in the Hebrew lexicon, and rescues many\nan old component part of that important language, which otherwise would\nremain utterly unknown.\n\nAn example will make this clear, and show that linguistic investigation\nand mythology have an equal share in the instruction to be derived from\nsuch inquiries.\n\nWe often meet in Hebrew with the verb hishk\u00eem, denoting \u2018to perform some\noccupation early in the morning\u2019 (the occupation itself being determined\nby a dependent verb), \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd. It represents the so-called\n_Hiph\u02bf\u00eel_-stem, which has regularly the sense of a factitive, but is not\nunfrequently used to express the entrance into a certain time or place,\nthe doing of an act in certain conditions of time or place. In this case\nthe Hiph\u02bf\u00eel verb is always derived from the noun which describes this\nplace or time. Here the conditions of time concern us most. We say, for\ninstance, he\u02bfer\u00eebh with the sense \u2018to enter on the evening,\u2019 \u2018to do\nsomething in the evening;\u2019 e.g. \u2018the Philistine came near _morning and\nevening_,\u2019 hashk\u00eam we-ha\u02bfar\u00eabh (I Sam. XVII. 16). The last word is\nderived from the noun \u02bferebh, \u2018evening.\u2019 From the word shachar, which\ndenotes \u2018the dawn,\u2019 is formed at a late stage of the language hishch\u00eer,\n\u2018to do something at that time;\u2019 and this Hiph\u02bf\u00eel form of shachar can\nthen appear beside that from \u02bferebh exactly like hishk\u00eem in an earlier\nage.[76] Now of course this verb hishk\u00eem must have a noun for its basis,\nwhich would denote \u2018morning.\u2019 But no such is found in the known Hebrew\nthesaurus, for the nominal form belonging to this root, shekhem, means\n\u2018neck,\u2019 and etymologists have given themselves much useless labour in\ntrying to find any tolerable connexion between the meaning of this noun\nand hishk\u00eem. The most bearable which they could give is that one who\nrises early to go after his business loads his neck with labour.[77] But\nany one may reply, Does one who does his work after dinner or in the\nevening load his neck with no labour? Considering the relation in which\nthese Hiph\u02bf\u00eel-forms stand to the nouns from which they are derived, we\nmight almost _a priori_ assert that in the ancient language shekhem must\nhave denoted \u2018morning\u2019 also. And in this instance mythological inquiry\noffers us the safest clue. The name _Shekhem_ [Shechem] figures in the\nHebrew myth as the ravisher of Dinah, Jacob\u2019s daughter. Without\nanticipating the analysis of this myth, which fits into the context of\none of the next chapters, we immediately recognise in the mythic name\n_Shekhem_ the noun from which the verb hishk\u00eem is derived. Thus the\nmythical appellation refers to the early morning, the red glow, as the\nravisher of the sun; and the same amorous connexion is expressed in\nvarious ways in the Aryan mythology also.\n\nNo one can deny that the consideration of the myth has here enriched the\nknowledge of the old Hebrew vocabulary; and thus, even on Hebrew ground,\nmythology and linguistic studies go hand in hand. This makes the\ninvestigation of language one of the richest sources for the discovery\nof the mythical ideas of early humanity.\n\n\n\u00a7 6. _e._) While the circle of thoughts which guide the prose style\nmoves on the level of the general principles current at the time of the\nwriter, poetical language and style, on the other hand, have a tendency\nto adopt modes of expression produced in a long past age in accordance\nwith the ideas then prevalent. These modes of expression, when they\narose, corresponded accurately with the general ideas of the time, and\nhad the signification which the _literal sense_ yields; they were used\nwhenever occasion offered for their employment, and everyone understood\nwhat was meant by them, for the thought would in that age never be\nexpressed otherwise. The poetical language of a later time preserves\nsuch modes of expression even when their significance in the general\nconception of things is lost, and the occurrences thereby indicated are\nimagined in a different way altogether; the language then becomes\n_figurative_, as it is called.[78] Thus the language of the Hebrew\npoetry and of those writers who speak in a lofty style bordering on that\nof poetry, and are called Prophets, preserves many of the modes of\nexpression derived from the ancient mythological ideas of the world.\nMythical material may consequently be found now and then here also.\n\nWhen e.g. Isaiah says (XIV. 28), \u2018I will sweep it with the besom of\ndestruction,\u2019 this is what we call a poetic figure\u2014destruction being\npictured as a broom that sweeps away from the surface of the earth those\nwho are to be destroyed. But from another side it is seen to be\nsomething more and different from a mere poetical figure, since its\norigin is due, not to an artistic idea of the speaker, but to an\nold-world mythical conception here employed figuratively, a conception\nwhich occurs in many cycles of mythology. For instance, the Maidens of\nthe Plague are represented with brooms in their hands, with which they\nsweep before house-doors and bring death into the village.[79] But\nIsaiah says again (XXVII. 1) that \u2018Jahveh with his sore and great and\nstrong sword shall punish Leviathan the piercing serpent, even Leviathan\nthat crooked serpent, and he shall slay the dragon (tann\u00een) that is in\nthe sea;\u2019 and Job (XXVI. 13), in his grand picture of the contest which\nJahveh wages against the tempest, and the defeat of the latter by the\nomnipotence of Jahveh, says \u2018By his breath the heavens are brightened;\nhis hand has pierced the flying serpent (n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh b\u00e2r\u00eeach)\u2019; and the\nprophet living in the Babylonian captivity addresses Jahveh in the\nfollowing words (Is. LI. 9): \u2018Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of\nJahveh! awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old! Art\nthou not it that didst kill the monster (rahabh), and wound the dragon\n(tann\u00een?)\u2019 &c.[80] In these expressions we observe that prophets and\npoets employ the long outgrown and obsolete notions of the myth of the\nbattle of the Sun against the flying serpent (Lightning) and against the\nrecumbent or curved serpent (Rain)\u2014the monsters which want to devour the\nSun, but which the Sun shoots down with his arrows (Rays) or wounds with\na volley of stones; or else of the myth of the battle of the Sun already\nset against the monster that lies in wait at the bottom of the sea to\ndevour him (a myth which is also preserved in the story of Jonah), only\nthat the monotheistic mind substituted Jahveh for the Sun. Many prophets\nfrequently speak in a perfectly general way, without reference to a\ndefinite historical event, of a passage through the sea. This is by no\nmeans a reminiscence of the Passage of the Red Sea, as an event in the\nprimeval history of the Hebrew people, unless a pointed reference is\nmade to that; it is another application of an old mythical notion of the\ncourse taken by the Sun-hero after sunset through the sea, so as to\nshine again on the following morning on the opposite shore. Indeed, that\nHebrew story of the Exodus itself, as we have indicated, is only a myth\ntransformed into history by a process which we can follow, step by step,\nin the history of the evolution of Mythology. This becomes very clear\nwhen we examine the sequel of the above-quoted words of the anonymous\nProphet of the Captivity (Is. LI. 10): \u2018Art not thou it which dryeth the\nsea, the waters of the great deep; that maketh the depths of the sea a\nway for the ransomed to pass over?\u2019 What is pictured in this verse is in\nthe mind of the speaker an event of the same character as that referred\nto in the preceding verse\u2014the killing of the Rahabh and the wounding of\nthe Tann\u00een. The description of Canaan, too, as a land \u2018flowing with milk\nand honey,\u2019 points back to the myth of a sun-land; for the myths call\nthe rays of the sun and moon \u2018milk and honey,\u2019 regarding the moon as a\nbee[81] and the sun as a cow. In Excursus E we shall speak of the\nmythological conception of rays of light as fluids. Palestine, which the\nwriter wished to pourtray as possessed of every blessing, thus receives\nattributes which the myth gave to a place above the earth, whence the\nblessings of light streamed down to it. It is noteworthy that in the\n\u00c7atapatha Br\u00e2hma\u1e47a the same mythic conception which is employed\npoetically in Hebrew meets us tinged already with an eschatological\ncolour. This work (XI. 5. 6. 4) makes _milk and honey_ flow in the\nabodes of the Blest.[82] We also see from this that the notion of a\n\u2018poetical figure\u2019 requires frequent limitation. Many apparently poetical\nfigures have their origin in an ancient mythical conception. Not\neverything that has the look of a poetical or rhetorical figure is one.\nWho would doubt, for instance, on a superficial glance, that such a\nphrase as n\u00e2r al-\u1e25arb, \u2018the fire of war,\u2019 was a figure of poetry or\nrhetoric? Yet it is not; it is not derived from what only exists in the\nfancy of the speaker, but from something which has a concrete, objective\nexistence. We learn this from the Arabic commentary on the proverb N\u00e2r\nal-\u1e25arb as\u02bfaru, \u2018the fire of war is burning.\u2019 The scholiast[83] says\n\u2018When the ancient Arabs began a war, they used to light a fire, to serve\nas a beacon for those eager for the fight.\u2019 It is also said (of the\nJews): \u2018As often as they light a fire for war, All\u00e2h extinguishes\nit.\u2019[84] Thus the fire of war of which the ancient Arabs spoke was only\na material or natural one.\n\n\n\u00a7 7. _f._) The Hebrew mythic tradition is not contained exclusively in\nthe Old Testament. This canon, indeed, was very far from receiving all\nthe remains of the old myths that were current among the people in an\nhistorical transformation. Much of it is contained in the tradition\nwhich was not incorporated with the canon, especially in the so-called\nRabbinical _Ag\u00e2d\u00e2_, which contains many a treasure of as high an\nantiquity as the mythological sources which we have named within the\ncanon. In the discovery of such elements in the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 circumspection and\ncautious criticism are necessary, because the valuable portion is only\nan excessively small fraction of the whole, and has to be picked out of\na preponderating mass of very different character. Still we must\nacknowledge the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 as a source for the discovery of the old Hebrew\nmyths. It has indeed already been employed for this purpose, though not\nalways wisely. The learned Professor F.L.W. Schwartz has referred to\nthis source,[85] and Julius Braun goes even too far in his mythological\nestimate of the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, when he says without limitation,[86] \u2018The\nRabbinical stories are anything but arbitrary inventions; they are\nechoes of primeval memories only refused entrance into the Bible by the\ncompilers of the canon. If Rabbinical erudition sometimes makes\nunfortunate attempts to confirm extrabiblical tradition by a Biblical\nquotation, and to prove its existence in Biblical times by imagined\nallusions, this is no proof that the whole tradition is only a\nspeculation derived from misunderstood Bible-words.\u2019 But Braun makes a\nvery bad use of the Rabbinical tradition, and vies with the foolish\nwriter Nork in taking from right and left without selection or judgment\nwhatever he can find, not caring whether it is Veda or Bible, Homer or\nthe Fathers, cuneiform inscriptions or some obscure allegorical writer.\n\nThe Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 in many places gives names to persons who are mentioned in the\nBible without name; and these names have frequently so antique a stamp,\nthat we cannot suppose them to be due to the capricious invention of the\nAgadists.[87] I believe that when these names appear justified by\ninternal evidence (i.e. when they show themselves quite fitting to the\nnature of the myth), they may be ancient and important for mythological\ninquiry. Of course we must not be ruled by excessive optimism, nor ever\nforget the freedom with which the Agadic fancy rules in its own\nsphere.[88] The same may be said also of the identifications, of which\nthe Agadists are very fond, and of the genealogical statements, which,\nthough deserving little attention from the historical point of view, may\nhave their origin in an old myth. So e.g. the Targ\u00fbm on I Sam. XVII. 4\ncalls Samson the father of Goliath.[89] Now Goliath is the giant whom\n\u2018the reddish hero with fine face\u2019 overcomes by throwing stones; in other\nwords, the Sun-hero throws stones at the monster of the storm. Thus the\nmyth may very well say that the Sun (Samson) is the father of this\nhostile giant of the night, just as the Sun in various forms frequently\nappears in the character of father or mother of the Night.\n\nIt is easily intelligible how difficult it must be to determine the\nmythological value of every such statement; and we have consequently\nmade very scanty use of this source. It might be relatively safer to use\nthem when they speak not merely of names and genealogies, but of actual\nstories. The Abram-story especially has preserved in its Agadic form\nmuch matter from ancient myths, the valuation of which by B. Beer, in a\nlucid compilation on this very portion of the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2,[90] is easily\naccessible. So e.g. the battle of Abram against Nimrod, which the\nmyth-investigator must take as the contest between the Nightly heaven\nand the Sun, is known only from the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2; the Scripture says not a word\nof it. For the solar character of Nimrod, which is however independently\nclear from the Biblical statements, the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 has again preserved a\nvaluable datum, viz. that 365 kings (equal to the days of the solar\nyear) appear ministering to him.[91] This is the same conception of the\nmyth as that Enoch, of whom again the solar event of the Ascension is\npreserved only in tradition, lived 365 years; or that Helios had herds\nof 350 cattle (7 herds of 50 each); and that in the Veda the Sun-god is\nblessed with 720 twin children, i.e. 360 days and nights,[92] and that\nhis chariot is drawn by seven horses, i.e. the seven days of the\nweek.[93]\n\nThe Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, again, has preserved the following mythical expression, which\nProfessor Schwartz interprets in this sense:[94] \u2018Abraham was in\npossession of a precious stone which he wore round his neck all his\nlife; when he died, God took the stone and hung it on the Sun.\u2019[95] As\nhas been fully proved with regard to Aryan mythology, especially by\nSchwartz and Kuhn, the myth calls the sunshine and other luminous bodies\nstones in general, or more specifically precious stones.[96] By night,\nas long as Abraham (the nightly heaven) lives, he bears the precious\nstone himself; when the night dies, God takes this stone (the moonlight)\nand hangs it on the sun.\n\nHow cautiously we must proceed in the mythological application of the\nAg\u00e2d\u00e2, is obvious to all who know the nature and origin of the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 and\nthe Agadic collections. I will adduce one other example to show how\neasily one might be led astray by yielding too trustingly and\nunconditionally to the temptation to employ this source in the\ninterpretation of myths.\n\nIn the course of our investigations, it will become certain that Jacob\nbelongs to the series of mythical figures which are connected with the\nnightly heaven. How easily would this conception be disturbed, if we\nwere to accord to all the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 an absolute voice among the sources of\nHebrew mythical investigation! For there it is said in reference to Gen.\nXXVIII. 11: \u2018He (Jacob) reached that place and passed the night there,\nfor _the sun was come_ (k\u00ee bh\u00e2 hash-shemesh), i.e. had set.\u2019 On this the\nAgadist Chagg\u00ee of Sephoris remarks, 'This sentence indicates that Jacob,\nwhen he was in Bethel, heard the welcoming voices of the angels: \"The\nSun is come, the Sun is come,\" i.e. Jacob himself. Many years later,\nwhen Jacob\u2019s son Joseph told his father the dream in which an allusion\nis made to Jacob as if he were the Sun (XXXVII. 9, 10), Jacob thought to\nhimself, \u2018Who has informed my son that my name is Sun?\u2019[97]\n\nI must point out one other peculiarity in this part of the subject.\nSometimes the Agadists utilise mythological elements, by supplementing\nthe old mythic tradition with something added by themselves, _based on\nsome one of their hermeneutic principles_, but which could not possibly\nbe also a portion of the old myth. An example will elucidate this. We\nwill not lay down dogmatically, nor on the other hand dispute the\npossibility, that the name Bile\u02bf\u00e2m _Balaam_ is mythical. It signifies\n\u2018the Devourer,\u2019 and has consequently been identified for centuries with\nthe Arabic Lo\u1e33m\u00e2n, which has the same meaning.[98] Accordingly Balaam\nwould originally have been a name of the monster which devours the sun.\nIt is not uncommon in mythology to find wisdom, cunning and prudence\nattributed to the powers hostile to the sun. Hence the serpent appears\nin the myth endowed with wisdom. This justifies Balaam\u2019s character as\nsage and prophet; the serpent delivers oracles, or is \u03bf\u1f30\u03c9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2.[99] Balaam\nis son of Be\u02bf\u00f4r, or \u2018the Shining\u2019\u2014a mythical expression which often\noccurs when the darkness is described as springing from the daylight;\nand the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 may be using mythic elements in identifying this Be\u02bf\u00f4r\nwith L\u00e2bh\u00e2n \u2018the White.\u2019[100] So this myth, like many others, would then\nhave been _nationalised_ by the influence of factors, which will be\nfully described in the Seventh Chapter. The Devourer of the Sun became a\nDevourer of the Hebrew people, just as the Sun-hero became the Hebrew\nnational hero. Personations of the storms are often exhibited in\nmythology as lame and limping.[101] This feature, which is not ascribed\nto Balaam in the Bible, is found in the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, which says, Bile\u02bf\u00e2m\nchigg\u00ear beragl\u00f4 achath h\u00e2y\u00e2, \u2018Balaam was lame of one foot.\u2019 So far all\nis regular. But then follows, Shimsh\u00f4n chigg\u00ear bisht\u00ea ragl\u00e2w h\u00e2y\u00e2,\n\u2018Samson was lame of both feet\u2019[102]\u2014a feature which does not suit the\nSun-hero. We must consider that this latter is an inference drawn by the\nAg\u00e2d\u00e2 in virtue of one of its hermeneutic principles, thus: Balaam\u2019s\nlameness is attached to the word sheph\u00ee, \u2018hill, high place,\u2019 Num. XXIII.\n3; the word sheph\u00eeph\u00f4n, \u2018serpent,\u2019 Gen. XLIX. 17 (in the declaration\nconcerning Dan, which the Agadists take as referring to Samson the\nDanite), must according to the Agadists\u2019 hermeneutics express by its\nform a doubling of the notion conveyed by sheph\u00ee.[103]\n\nThus only what is said about Balaam could possibly belong to the old\nmyth; what is said about Samson is late Agadic induction, which has no\nimportance whatever for mythology.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 72:\n\n We shall treat of this in the Third Section of Chapter VIII.\n\nFootnote 73:\n\n Translated and given as an Appendix to this volume.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 74:\n\n How readily Alexander\u2019s history was combined with the Solar myth is\n best proved by the fact that Arabian tradition gives Alexander a\n Sun-name, the variously interpreted \u1e0e\u00fb-l-karnein = the Horned, i.e.\n the Beaming.\n\nFootnote 75:\n\n Translated and given as an Appendix to this volume.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 76:\n\n _Wayyi\u1e33r\u00e2 rabb\u00e2_, sect. XIX.: hishch\u00eer we-he\u02bfer\u00eebh.\n\nFootnote 77:\n\n See Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 1406. _b._\n\nFootnote 78:\n\n See Hermann Cohen\u2019s dissertation, _Die dichterische Phantasie und der\n Mechanismus des Bewusstseins_, in the _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr\n V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, &c. 1869, VI. 239 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 79:\n\n On the German legends in which this idea occurs see Henne-Am-Rhyn,\n _Die deutsche Volkssage_, Leipzig 1874, p. 268 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 80:\n\n See Ps. LXXIV. 13\u201314; LXXXIV. 11. There is nothing to justify those\n interpreters who, caring nothing for the remains of ancient myths,\n always wish to understand by _Rahabh_ and _Tann\u00een_ the kingdom of\n Egypt.\n\nFootnote 81:\n\n Angelo de Gubernatis, _Zoological Mythology_, II. 217. On the meaning\n of milk and honey in the Hebrew myth, Steinthal has written\n exhaustively in his Treatise on the Story of Samson, given in the\n Appendix.\n\nFootnote 82:\n\n See Weber in the _Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, 1855, IX. 238.\n\nFootnote 83:\n\n Al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee, _Majma\u02bf al-amth\u00e2l_, II. 203.\n\nFootnote 84:\n\n _Kor\u00e2n_, S\u00fbr. V. v. 69.\n\nFootnote 85:\n\n _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_ [i.e. Bd. I. of _Die poetischen\n Naturanschauungen_, &c.], p. 4.\n\nFootnote 86:\n\n _Die Naturgeschichte der Sage_, I. 127.\n\nFootnote 87:\n\n See Excursus A.\n\nFootnote 88:\n\n Such names have often planted themselves firmly in popular tradition,\n and are accordingly mentioned in various quarters with perfect\n uniformity. So e.g. \u0399\u03b1\u03bd\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2 and \u0399\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c2, who appear both in Rabbinical\n writings and in 2 Tim. III. 8 (see Jablonski, _Opuscula_, ed. Te\n Water, II. 23).\n\nFootnote 89:\n\n See Wilhelm Bacher\u2019s treatise, _Kritische Untersuchungen zum\n Prophetentarg\u00fbm_ (_Zeitschrift der D. M. G._ 1874, XXVIII. 7).\n\nFootnote 90:\n\n _Leben Abraham\u2019s nach Auffassung der j\u00fcdischen Sage_, Leipzig 1859.\n Another good compilation is that of Hamburger, _Geist der Hagada_,\n Leipzig 1857, I. 39\u201350.\n\nFootnote 91:\n\n _B\u00eath ham-midr\u00e2sh: Sammlung kleiner Midrashim und vermischter\n Abhandlungen aus der j\u00fcdischen Literatur_, ed. Ad. Jellinck, Vienna\n 1873, V. 40.\n\nFootnote 92:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Essays_ [German translation of _Chips_], II. 147; not in\n the English.\n\nFootnote 93:\n\n Rigveda, L. 8; CCCXCIX. 9.\n\nFootnote 94:\n\n _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, p. 4.\n\nFootnote 95:\n\n Bab. B\u00e2bh\u00e2 bathr\u00e2, fol. 16. _b._\n\nFootnote 96:\n\n See Kuhn, _Ueber Entwickelungsstufen der Mythenbildeng (Abhandl. der\n k\u00f6n. Akad. d. W._ 1873, Berlin 1874), p. 144.\n\nFootnote 97:\n\n Ber\u00eash\u00eeth rabb\u00e2, sect. 68.\n\nFootnote 98:\n\n See on the other side Ewald, _History of Israel_ (2nd or 3rd ed.), II.\n 214.\n\nFootnote 99:\n\n Welcker, _Griechische G\u00f6tterlehre_, Gottingen 1857, I. 66.\n\nFootnote 100:\n\n I find this identification, it is true, only in later books, T\u00e2n\u00e2\n de-bh\u00ea El\u00eey\u00e2, c. 27; S\u00eader \u02bf\u00f4l\u00e2m, c. 21; see Hal\u00e2kh\u00f4th ged\u00f4l\u00f4th\n (hilkh\u00f4th hasp\u00ead). In the S\u00eader had-d\u00f4r\u00f4th, under the year 2189, Beor\n is called son of Laban. On Laban see Chap. V. \u00a7 11. Besides the name\n Lo\u1e33m\u00e2n, which in signification corresponds with Bile\u02bf\u00e2m (Balaam), we\n find in the Preislamite genealogy of the Arabs, which in my opinion is\n largely mixed up with mythical names, the chief Bal\u02bf\u00e2\u02beu, who is said\n to have been a leper (Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-ishti\u1e33\u00e2\u1e33_, p. 106. 8). It\n should be observed that this is a man\u2019s name with the grammatical form\n of a feminine adjective.\n\nFootnote 101:\n\n See Chap V. \u00a7 10 end.\n\nFootnote 102:\n\n S\u00f4\u1e6d\u00e2, fol. 10. _a._\n\nFootnote 103:\n\n See Excursus B.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n _THE METHOD OF INVESTIGATING HEBREW MYTHS._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. The method of investigation is intended to discover\u2014how the\noriginal myth is to be reached through the sources described in the\npreceding chapter, how the primitive germ of the myth is to be freed\nfrom the husk which in the course of its growth has been formed around\nit, and further how the progress and lapse of this growth itself are to\nbe recognised. Then we shall be enabled to determine how stratum upon\nstratum has fastened itself round the original myth until it reached\nthat configuration which is the concrete material of our investigation.\nThe development of the myth in any nation is mainly determined by two\nfactors, which give to this development the direction actually taken.\nOne group of these factors is _psychological_, the other belongs to the\n_history of civilisation_.[104] The psychological factors in the\ndevelopment of all myths are the same, not changing with the special\ncharacter of the people whose myths form the subject of our\nconsideration. For the same general laws everywhere determine the life\nof the soul; no difference in them is introduced by the ethnological\nlife and the peculiarity of race of the people in question. There is a\npsychology of mankind, or as it was called when Lazarus introduced the\nscience, a Psychology of Nations (_V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_). This is not a\ncontemplation of the modes in which the intellectual life of various\nnations exhibits itself as acting in opposite directions, but of the\nmodes in which the same laws find their expression and validity in the\nintellectual life of the most various nations. But there is no special\npsychology of races. On the other hand, the factors belonging to the\n_history of civilisation_ are not everywhere alike, but are as various\nas the historical fates of the nations among themselves are various. We\nshall subsequently come back to the subject to show more fully that\nmyths share in the historical vicissitudes of their nation, that they\nare always transformed in accordance with the stages of civilisation\nwhich the nation itself passes through in its historical development,\nand that accordingly the configuration of the myth is a faithful mirror\nof the stage of civilisation at which it has taken this particular\nconfiguration. Obviously therefore, we can duly estimate the myth\nthrough all its stages of development only in connexion with a\ncomprehensive view over the historical development of the civilisation\nof the nation itself. And to gain this view we must especially attend to\nthose phenomena which might produce an altered direction of the mind,\nand thus impress a new form on the myth also. But as in the methodical\nobservation of the intellectual development of a nation in the course of\nits history psychological points of view must again occupy the\nforeground, we may assert that psychological observation must take up a\nprominent position in the method of mythological investigation; for the\nquestion will always be, What transformation does this or that\nhistorical vicissitude produce in that which makes up the sum of the\nhuman mind? The answer will however evidently turn out different\naccording to the nature of these historical vicissitudes. But there is\none special step of transformation which stands earlier than and in no\nconnexion with the separate history of the nation, and is produced by a\npurely psychological operation. This transformation is therefore common\nto all myths\u2014so much so that most inquirers, and especially Max M\u00fcller,\nmake the life of the myth to begin only at this stage.\n\nIt is the stage of mental development which is signalised by a\nremarkable fact in the history of language: viz., that an endless\nmultitude of names, bestowed upon the phenomena and processes of nature,\nin virtue of various features of which there is a preponderating\nconsciousness at the moment of perception, gradually lose their meaning;\nwhile some few features of the total phenomenon are retained, to\nrepresent all those particular factors and supply comprehensive general\nterms for their sum total. For example, the Sun has at first a countless\nnumber of designations. It is not merely that, in its various aspects,\nthe Sun is treated as the subject of detached observation unrelated in\nthought to that of other aspects of the same Sun; but the very same\naspect, on repeated notice, is regarded as something different every\ntime, and is accordingly denoted by other names. In other words,\nborrowed from the terminology of modern psychology, no _fusion_\n(_Verflechtung_) has yet been effected. Long-continued observation of\nthe same aspects gives consciousness of their identity under repetition,\nand makes possible the fusion of their ideas. Next, by a further advance\nin development, the psychological change emerges, through which the\nvarious features of the same phenomenon cease to be essential\ndifference-marks in the idea, and, dropping into the background, give\nplace to a general conception gained by their fusion, an aggregate of\nfusion (_Verflechtungsmasse_), the product of often-repeated\nfusion.[105] The effect on language of this psychological change is\nthat, through its gradual operation, the meaning is lost from the great\nmajority of those expressions which arose merely because the particular\nobservations of the same aspect of a phenomenon, or the various features\nof the same phenomenal aggregate had not yet been brought into unity by\nthe process of fusion or blending.\n\nBy the abandonment of the difference-marks, the sum total of all the\naspects, now regarded as forming one unity, is given over to one single\nword, and a vast number of old designations, which stood in connexion\nwith one particular aspect or one particular condition of observation,\nlose in the mind of the speaker all connexion with the physical\nphenomenon in question. The multiplicity of names becomes objectless,\nloses all psychological basis, and vanishes.[106] What vanishes,\nhowever, is only the consciousness of the connexion of the multifarious\nnames with the physical phenomenon; in other words, the names cease in\ngreat part to be designations of the phenomena, yet remain in existence.\nBut they have a very different value to the mind from their original\none. They become _Proper Names_; and what the sentences in which these\nnames figured as subjects and objects originally predicated of physical\nphenomena, they now say of persons and individuals. The transition is\nfacilitated by the fact that the physical phenomena themselves, whose\nnames they were in an earlier stage of intelligence, are conceived under\nthe figure of human actions, as loving, fighting, persecuting, &c. We\nmust here observe emphatically that from this process in the history of\nlanguage the Semitic area was not excluded. In the course of the\nfollowing expositions we shall have occasion to convince ourselves that\nmythological appellatives forfeited their appellative character just\nlike those of the Aryan myths. The Hebrew said \u2018he laughs,\u2019 \u2018he hides,\u2019\n\u2018he trips up,\u2019 \u2018he increases,\u2019 &c. in a strictly mythical sense; in\nlater times the meaning of these assertions was forgotten, and a proper\nname took the place of each. What Max M\u00fcller says of Semitic speech,\nthat \u2018those who used the word were unable to forget its predicative\nmeaning, and retained in most cases a distinct consciousness of its\nappellative power,\u2019[107] is not true, at least of this portion of\nSemitism.\n\nNow this is the very earliest step in the transformation of the myth. As\nwe have seen, this transformation is conditioned only by a psychological\noperation, and is therefore common to every mythology. Some scholars are\ninclined to draw nothing that precedes this transformation into the\ndomain of myths at all, and to say that these begin only when, as Max\nM\u00fcller says, _the language_ (i.e. the living consciousness of the\noriginal signification of the multifarious names) _dies_. But we hold\nthat there is every reason to regard the stage at which those\nexpressions lived in the human mind with their original appellative\nsense, as one of the proper mythic stages. That event which Max M\u00fcller\ntreats as the commencement of the development of the myth, indicates the\nfirst link in the long chain of transformations which make up the\nhistory of the myth. It is not a characteristic of the myth, that the\nspeaker is no longer conscious of speaking of physical phenomena. As\nsoon as ever he perceives physical phenomena as events in human life, he\nhas at once made a myth; and every name by which he designates a\nphysical phenomenon forms a myth. For if unintelligibility or\nobsoleteness of language were a condition of a myth\u2019s existence, then\nthere could be no myth when the Greek calls H\u00ealios the brother of\nSel\u00ean\u00ea, since both these names have been retained in their original\nsense, and the Greek knew that the former name meant Sun and the latter\nMoon, though of H\u00earakl\u00eas and Helen\u00ea he had no similar consciousness\nleft. Similarly, it could not be a myth when the Roman said that Aurora\nopens the gates of the Sun and strews roses on his way, since every\nRoman knew that the name Aurora denoted the Dawn.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. It is easy to see that the first step in the formation of myths\ncould not be a short and quickly passing stage. If it were so, the\nappellations of physical phenomena could not have become so firmly\nestablished as to prolong their existence even after a great majority of\nthem had become linguistically meaningless, and to become objects of\nmythical transformation. The psychological process which brought about\nthe identification of an object with itself must therefore have taken\nplace late in the development of the human mind. Men had already\nexpressed most various notions of the phenomena of nature and observed\nthem in many phases, long before they attained to the power of\nidentifying one such repeatedly occurring phenomenon with itself,\nnotwithstanding the regularity of its appearance.\n\nOne other psychological consideration, however, demands our attention\nhere\u2014one among many; for a systematic presentation of all the\npsychological forces with which we have to reckon in investigating myths\nand the history of their growth belongs to a Philosophy of Mythology,\nwhich it is not our intention to give here.\n\nAmong the various categories, that of Space is the earliest to become an\nobject of consciousness to the human soul, both in the genetic\ndevelopment of the individual mind and in that of the human race. The\nattachment of a notion to space is the earliest developed; indeed the\nnotion of a thing without the notion of space is impossible. Even beasts\ndistinguish things by their space. Hence L. Geiger correctly said that\nLanguage, the origin of which also marks the first phase of the power of\nthought, \u2018springs from\u2019 the organ of the discrimination of space, \u2018the\nEye and Light.\u2019 With the category of Time it is otherwise. The\ndiscrimination of things in time is unfolded relatively later; it\npostulates a more delicate degree of observation. The notion of Space\nemanates from that sense, the use of which man acquires the earliest and\nthe most easily of all except that of touch\u2014the sense of Sight; the\nexcitement of which also gives the first impulse to the formation of\nlanguage. But the notion of Time demands more than a mere sensuous\nperception. We need not therefore be surprised if the notion of Space,\nboth in the individual and in history, is older than that of Time, nor\nthat, as language teaches, all the finer distinctions of opposite terms\nemanate from the notion of Space,[108] and the very distinctions of Time\nitself were originally conceived from the point of view of Space. To\nverify this, we only need to observe the expressions still in daily use,\nwhich can be applied to time, such as, _before_, _after_, _thereafter_,\n_space of time_, _short_ or _long_ time. The Semitic is very instructive\non this point. The Hebrew sh\u00e2m, originally used of place (_there_) is\nfound applied to time (_then_); in Arabic these two significations are\ndivided between thumma \u2018then\u2019 and thamma \u2018there.\u2019 Hebrew words, such as\nliphen\u00ea \u2018before\u2019 and achar\u00ea \u2018after,\u2019 \u1e33edem, \u1e33adm\u00f4n, \u2018old, olden time,\u2019\nbring before our eyes a very clear view of the transition from local to\ntemporal distinctions, when we take into consideration their original\nsignifications. The Arabic beyna yedeyy, or beyna eyd\u00ee, is also\nespecially instructive. This phrase signifies \u2018between the hands,\u2019 and\nis used very commonly for \u2018before,\u2019 of space. But even in early\nclassical texts (e.g. in the \u1e32or\u00e2n) it passes over into the \u2018before\u2019 of\ntime. \u2018Between the hands of the Prophet,\u2019 thus means either _standing\nbefore him_ as to place, or _preceding him_ in time. Now that which we\nmeet thus at every step in the Semitic and Aryan, is found also in the\nthird great stock of languages. The time-particles of the Anaric\nlanguages often go back to relations of space; and what the German\n_Zeitraum_ \u2018space of time,\u2019 and the Arabic _mudd\u00e2_ (properly\n\u2018extension,\u2019 but generally in the sense of a \u2018period of time\u2019) exemplify\nto us, we see also e.g. in the Finnish _kausi_, which is used to express\na _piece of time_. It properly signifies a _direction or way_, in a\nlocal sense; and the related Esthonian word _kaude_ is still used\nexclusively to denote local relations.[109]\n\nIn myths also we find the conception of Space and of motion in space\npredominant. A large group of names of the Dawn in the Aryan mythology\nis formed by composition of adjectives with \u03b5\u1f50\u03c1\u03c5 and its etymological\nrelatives, and yields variations on the notion \u2018shining afar,\u2019[110]\nalways bearing witness to local extension and motion. And in the Hebrew\nmyths a number of solar names designate the solar figures, as _going_,\n_moving_, &c.[111] Even in cases where _rapid_ motion is spoken of, a\ngreat result of such motion is not treated as attained in a _short\ntime_; but described rather by the _space_ that has been passed through.\n\nOn the other hand, when we consider the notion of Time, and the question\nhow far it is acknowledged in myths, we observe that at the earliest\nmythical stage the distinction of Time is only very feebly presented. We\nmust demonstrate this at this place while treating of the method of\nmythology. The myth makes a distinction between the bright radiant sunny\nheaven and the dark heaven. Now as to this darkness, it is indifferent\nwhether it is the darkness of night or that of the overclouded heaven by\nday. The myth notices only the phenomenon of the dark sky, darkness as a\nphysical fact or state, considers only _What_ is there? but does not\ndistinguish the _When_?\u2014the time in which this darkness occurs. Hence in\nthe myth the nightly heaven and the stormy or cloudy heaven are\nsynonymous, since it does not distinguish day and night as alternate\nperiods of time, but only brightness and darkness as phenomena. Hence it\ncomes that even in later poetry and language the notions of _Rain_ and\n_Night_ are so closely connected, that rain is more naturally thought of\nin union with night than with day; therefore it is said in Arabic, \u2018more\nliberal than the rainy night\u2019 (anda min al-leyl\u00e2 al-m\u00e2\u1e6dir\u00e2).[112] Not\nonly the rain, but the _Wind_ also, in contrast to the merry laughing\nsunshine, is conceived as closely connected with the night.[113] In the\nMohammedan cosmogonic legend it is said that the rough Wind lives on the\ncurtain of the Darkness.[114] Hence also we see that the myth does not\ndistinguish between the _Morning Glow_ and the _Evening Glow_, but\ndenotes the phenomenon by itself, without caring whether it precedes or\nfollows the night. In connexion with this stands the fact that, as\nSteinthal has recently briefly noted,[115] mythic thought did not attain\nto the category of Causality; for this category presupposes a clear\nconsciousness of succession, or of one event following another in time.\nOnly thus can we explain myths which speak of the Dawn now as the\ndaughter, now as the mother of the Day. On the domain of language some\nphenomena in the semasiology of Arabic words can be explained from this\nfact of the development of conceptions, as e.g. when the lexicographers\ntranslate the verb safar II. IV. to \u2018pasture _early_ or _late_\u2019: IV. V.\n\u2018to come at the _morning_ or _evening_ glow\u2019.[116] Except by the\noperation of the above-named psychological fact, the express combination\nof these two definitions of time in one word would seem to be\nimpossible.\n\nBut the very fact just mentioned, that it is characteristic of mythical\nideas to put one phenomenon into a family relation towards another, and\nto speak of mother, brother, son, daughter, &c., furnishes the first\nelements of and impulses towards the discrimination of _Succession in\ntime_, though the discrimination itself may at the mythic stage not yet\nbreak forth into life. Phenomena occurring one after another or\nsimultaneously are conceived in the light of the most primitive\nrelations of the family; and when the myth-forming man speaks of father\nand child, the very use of these terms rouses and encourages in his mind\na new category, that of _Succession in time_, or more definitely\n_Causality_.\n\nAnother point follows naturally from this, enabling us to fix the\nchronological position occupied by certain myths in relation to others.\nIf in a myth we find the fact of the temporal succession of a phenomenon\ntreated as important, or see that a following event is in its very name\ndescribed as such in relation to what preceded it, then we can justly\ndraw the conclusion that a myth of this form belongs to an advanced\nstage of development, and that in determining the time of its origin we\nmust choose a later period than we should for myths in which no\nconscious notion of time is visible. We shall have occasion to insist on\nthis inference when we come into the presence of such mythic expressions\nas Yipht\u00e2ch _Jephthah_, i.e. the \u2018Opener,\u2019 and Ya\u02bfa\u1e33obh _Jacob_, i.e.\nthe \u2018Follower.\u2019\n\n\n\u00a7 3. What has to be said on the _historical_ aspect of the method of\nmythical investigation follows from the mode in which the myth grows\nunder the influence of historical factors. If, after the first\ntransformation of the myth occasioned by a purely psychological process,\nthere are factors which immediately cause its further development, it is\nof course the business of mythic investigation to find out those\ntransformative forces which have fastened themselves on a previous stage\nof development. Beginning therefore from the latest aspect of the myth,\nwe have to follow it further and further up, to arrive by help of the\nthread of historical research at a knowledge of the process of\nhistorical development which operated on the myth and caused the\ntransformation. Thus we ascend step by step to the point at which the\nabove-described psychological process caused the individualising of the\nmythic figures. From this point it is only a step to the original\nformation of the myth, at which the appellations proper to the mythic\nfigures are not proper names but appellative nouns. It is easy to see\nthat, while investigation takes a retrograde course, beginning with the\nlatest form of the myth and going back to arrive at its original form,\nexposition will take the contrary direction and pourtray its historical\ntransformation in the natural order of growth, beginning with the\nprimitive form discovered by analysis, and demonstrating successive\ntransformations by the aid of history.\n\nIt is advisable, before we proceed to the materials of Hebrew mythic\ninvestigation, to elucidate the course of this historical method by a\nwell-known example.\n\nLet us take the story which is presented in Genesis, chap. XXII.\nAbraham, the forefather of the Hebrew people, at the behest of El\u00f4h\u00eem,\nis about to offer his only son Isaac as a sacrifice, but is prevented by\nan angel of Jahveh, who shows him a ram entangled in the thicket, which\nhe may offer as a sacrifice to Jahveh instead of his son. The various\nreligious tendencies connected with the two Divine names, El\u00f4h\u00eem and\nJahveh are scarcely so prominent in any part of the Pentateuch as in the\nsmall passage under consideration. We see here the divergence of the\nreligious ideas on both sides in reference to the value of _human\nsacrifice_. Not yet fully released from the Canaanitish system, the\nearly Elohistic religious tendency as yet regards it as an\nunobjectionable performance. Jahveism abominates it, and is satisfied\nwith the _temper_ which is ready to sacrifice\u2014the _intentio_; though\nthis may very well be brought to express itself in the substituted\nsacrifice of a beast or something else. Hence our story makes El\u00f4h\u00eem\ndemand the human offering, and Jahveh recommend the substitution.[117]\nThe present form of the legend is accordingly the product of the\nreligious polemic waged by the Prophets against the popular view of\nreligion which still clung to the Canaanitish system; and the apologists\nof the Jahveistic idea intend to show by it the advance which their own\nreligious views had taken beyond those of earlier times.[118] The\ndivergent ideas held by these two Hebrew religious parties on human\nsacrifice are also to be seen in the legislative portions of the Bible.\nIn these we can distinguish passages in which the sacrifice of the\nfirst-born of beasts is not clearly discriminated from the\nsanctification of the first-born child, from others in which the latter\nhas already gained a merely theocratic meaning and is put in connexion\nwith the deliverance of the people out of Egypt. Therefore, what is\ndeeply impressed on these passages of legislation, viz. the battle\nbetween the Canaanitish religious tendency and the national Hebrew idea\nof Jahveh according to the Prophets, finds a memento in the conformation\nof the existing very late myth of the sacrifice of Isaac. It has the\nsame purpose as the passage of Deuteronomy (XII. 31), in which the\npolemic against human sacrifice as a religious institution of the\nCanaanites comes most prominently forward: \u2018Thou shalt not do so unto\nJahveh thy God; for every abomination to Jahveh which he hateth have\nthey done unto their El\u00f4h\u00eem; for even their sons and their daughters\nthey have burned in the fire to their El\u00f4h\u00eem.\u2019 This polemic tendency in\nthe service of the Jahveh-idea, and the religious views attached to it,\ngave the myth in question the form in which it is known to us. But that\ncannot be the original form. Stripped of its Jahveistic coating, the\nmyth remains in the following form: \u2018El\u00f4h\u00eem demanded from Abraham the\nsacrifice of his only son, and Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac\nfor El\u00f4h\u00eem.\u2019 But again, the myth could take this form only in a time\nwhen the religious idea of El\u00f4h\u00eem had already gained such full life in\nthe Hebrew people as to impel them to sacrifice what was dearest to\nthem. When the myth had this form, accordingly, there was in Canaan\nalready a monotheistic religion, the centre of which was El\u00f4h\u00eem the\nobject of adoration, while the ancestors of the Hebrew people were his\npious servants and favourites. This coating also must be stripped off,\nif we wish to trace the myth analytically to its primitive form. When we\nhave stripped off the religious coating, we have still not yet\npenetrated to the central germ; for, independently of any religious\ntendency, Abraham remains as Patriarch, as a national figure; and this\nbrings us into the historical epoch when the Hebrew people, attaining to\na consciousness of national peculiarity and opposition to the\nsurrounding Canaanitish peoples, constructed their own early history.\nAccordingly, the national coating has now to be thrown off; and then\nAbraham meets us as a (so to say) cosmopolitan figure\u2014not yet\ntransformed into the likeness of one nation, but still as a person, an\nindividual. This stage of mythic development brings us to the\npsychological process which caused the mythological _persons_ to come\nforth at the beginning; and behind this stage we find the original form\nof the myth: \u2018Abram kills his son Isaac\u2019 At that primitive stage these\nexpressions naturally signified no more than the words imply. \u2018\u05d0\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05e8\u05b8\u05dd\nAbh R\u00e2m, the _Lofty Father_, kills his son \u05d9\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05e7 Yi\u1e63ch\u00e2\u1e33, the\n_Laugher_.\u2019 The Nightly Heaven and the Sun, or the Sunset, child of the\nNight,[119] fell into a strife in the evening, the result of which is\nthat the Lofty Father kills his child; the day must give way to night.\n\nIn the above example we have endeavoured to give a short sketch, less of\nthe progress of development of the Hebrew myth, than of the method by\nwhich, observing the most prominent forces in the historical development\nof the intellectual life of the Hebrews, we can rise by analysis from\nthe latest form of the myths to the original. Having reached this, we\nmust confide ourselves to the guidance of the Science of Language; for\nthat particular source for mythic inquiry which was treated in \u00a7 5 of\nthe preceding chapter has chiefly to do with the primitive form of the\nmyth. The myth is accompanied through all its stages of development by\nthe same constant terms of language: these are, accordingly, the oldest\nmatter for investigation on the mythological field.\n\nThus, taking it all together, the Method of mythic investigation turns\non three hinges: 1. Psychology, 2. History, 3. Science of Language.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 104:\n\n \u2018Die andere _culturhistorisch_.\u2019 I am obliged to render this\n convenient adjective by a circumlocution, as \u2018civilisation-historical\u2019\n would be too cumbrous and hardly intelligible.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 105:\n\n I must refer those readers who are not sufficiently familiar with the\n terminology to Steinthal\u2019s _Abriss der Sprachwissenschaft_, Berlin\n 1871, vol. I., where all this is fully discussed in the section\n _Elementare psychische Processe_.\n\nFootnote 106:\n\n But it is to be observed that some of the expressions produced by\n Polyonymy [multitude of names] survive the process of fusion and\n remain with the original signification; thus e.g. several names for\n Moon in Hebrew. On such names Synonymy, a secondary function of\n conscious speech, then performs its work.\n\nFootnote 107:\n\n _Chips_, First Series, pp. 356, 361.\n\nFootnote 108:\n\n On the Pronoun Wilhelm von Humboldt\u2019s essay, _Ueber die Verwandtschaft\n der Ortsadverbien mit dem Pronomen_, Berlin 1830, still deserves\n study. See also what is said below (Chap. V. \u00a7 6) on \u00c2sh\u00ear.\n\nFootnote 109:\n\n Budenz, in the Hungarian review _Magyar Nyelv\u0151r_ (\u2018Guardian of the\n Hungarian Language\u2019), 1875, IV. 57.\n\nFootnote 110:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Chips_, II. pp. 93\u2013106.\n\nFootnote 111:\n\n See Chap. V \u00a7 5, 6.\n\nFootnote 112:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, I. 133. 19. Compare _al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee_, ed. B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33, II.\n 262. 4.\n\nFootnote 113:\n\n Both wind and rain are placed in connexion with the night in the\n _D\u00eev\u00e2n of the Hu\u1e0failites_, ed. Kosegarten, p. 125, v.5: ta\u02bft\u00e2duhu\n r\u00ee\u1e25u-sh-shim\u00e2li bi\u1e33urrih\u00e2 * f\u00ee kulli leylatin d\u00e2jinin wa-hut\u00fbni, \u2018the\n Northwind blows over it with his coldness every cloudy rainy night.\u2019\n\nFootnote 114:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt\u2019s _Geogr. Dictionary_, I. 24. 2.\n\nFootnote 115:\n\n _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, &c. 1874, VIII. 179.\n\nFootnote 116:\n\n See B\u00f6ttcher\u2019s article on this group of roots in H\u00f6fer\u2019s _Zeitschrift\n f\u00fcr die Wissenschaft der Sprache_ (Greifswald 1851), III. 16.\n\nFootnote 117:\n\n See especially the lucid exposition of Dr. Abr. Geiger, in his _Das\n Judenthum und seine Geschichte_ (2nd edit.), I. 51.\n\nFootnote 118:\n\n In other countries also human sacrifices have been abolished by a\n reform of religion, and sacrifices limited to beasts and vegetables;\n e.g. in Mexico, where the reform is attributed to Quetzalcoatl. See\n Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, IV. 141.\n\nFootnote 119:\n\n The Sunset is child of Night only if we keep before our eyes the\n mythical identity of the Morning and Evening Glow, according to \u00a7 2 of\n this chapter.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n _NOMADISM AND AGRICULTURE._\n\n\nThe basis of all modern Comparative Mythology, and the principle from\nwhich we start on the present studies, is that the Myth is only the\nexpression in language of the impression made on the men of ancient time\nby the physical events and changes under the immediate influence of\nwhich they lived. If this is true, it cannot be questioned that the\ntendency and quality of the Myth must change, independently of the\nmatter and contents which remain the same, in obedience to the advancing\ncivilisation of men. For all progress in civilisation is marked,\nspeaking generally, by continual development of the relation in which\nman stands to external nature. When a nation emerges from the stage of\nNomadism and advances to an agricultural life, its relation to external\nnature is changed. The same thing happens when a people that lived\nexclusively by the chase and fishing advances to Nomadism. Since a new\nepoch in the development of human civilisation has commenced in our own\ntimes through the progress made in physical science, our relation to\nnature has again entered on a new phase. The spirit of modern\ncivilisation has been characterised by the common-place, that reason has\nsubdued nature.\n\nThe Myth accompanied mankind from the first germ to the highest stage of\nmental culture, always adapting itself to man\u2019s intellectual field of\nview and changing with the measure of this field of view. It is\ntherefore a faithful mirror of the ideas of the world held by the men of\neach age; and these ideas are nowhere so clearly reflected as in myths.\nThe configuration and tendency of the myths is always dependent on the\nideas of men at that particular stage of civilisation which gave the\nmyth its form and guided it to its special tendency. The traces of these\nhistorical transformations of the myths are scarcely distinguishable for\nsmall chronological divisions; but when the larger epochs of\ncivilisation are under consideration, they cannot fail to be noted by\nthe explorer\u2019s eye. And the discovery and demonstration of these\ntransformations of the tendency of the myths in their relation to the\ngreat epochs of civilisation is one of the special problems of\nComparative Mythology.\n\nThe solution of this problem has an intimate connexion with the answer\nto the question, \u2018When does the life of the Myth begin, and when does it\nend? what is its _terminus a quo_, and what its _terminus ad quem_?\u2019\nThis question is obviously closely bound up with the results of the\npsychological inquiry into the essence and conditions of production of\nthe myth. The myth lives from the moment that man begins to interpret\nphysical phenomena through processes brought before his eyes by his own\nevery-day life and action; and as soon as the human mind uses in the\ninterpretation of the phenomena of nature utterly different means from\nthose prevalent in all myths, i.e. as soon as the phenomena of nature\nare not interpreted from human conditions, the myth has ended its life,\nand yields up its elements for other combinations. It is self-evident\nthat the commencing point of the creation of myths cannot be later than\nthe first beginnings of language; for Myth and Language are two modes of\nutterance of the same intellectual activity, and the oldest declarations\nof the human mind. Even in the Miocene age we find man\u2014the so-called\nfossil man\u2014in possession of fire: so that even then the conditions were\nalready present for the first growth of the elements of a\nPrometheus-myth. In the Postpliocene age we find him already endowed\nwith the first breath of religious feeling, if, as is generally done, we\ncan allow the careful graveyards found at Aurillac, Cro-Magnon and\nMenton, to pass as historical data.[120] The end of the life of the myth\ncoincides with the moment at which is formed out of the elements of the\nmyth a _religious_ conception of the world peopled with gods. The living\nand conscious existence of the myth is finished when the mythical\nfigures become gods. Theology hurls the myth from its throne. But this\nis the end only of the living existence of the primitive myth; the myth\ntransfigured and newly interpreted in a religious sense lives on, and\nonly now begins to pass through a rich and various series of stages of\ndevelopment, each marked by a corresponding stage of the religion and\ncivilisation of the men who possess it. There then spring from mythic\nelements, sagas, fables, tales, legends. And as religion in its primal\norigin appears in history not in opposition to myths, but as a higher\ndevelopment of them, the life of religion does not absolutely exclude\nthat of myths. There remain, beside the myth which has been transformed\ninto religion, other portions of the mythic matter which religion has\nnot yet touched, and these live on as myths, so long as the process of\nreligious transformation has not drawn them into its domain. Pure and\nfree Monotheism in its highest development is the first force that comes\nforward as a denial of the mythic elements in religion. The religious\nhistory of the Hebrews reached this stage when Jahveism was fully\ndeveloped.\n\nWe will for the present not trouble ourselves with these scions of the\ntransformed myth. We will first study it only at the early stages when\nit still lives an unclouded, young, fresh life, untroubled by\nmisunderstanding\u2014the life that precedes the origin of religion from\nmythic elements. There are two successive stages in the historical\ndevelopment of mankind, which have to be considered in the course of the\nexpositions to which this chapter is devoted, the _Nomadic_ and the\n_Agricultural_. In the former commences the chain of development, which\nis closed by the formation of perfect, true Society. First are formed\ncommunities which, though still standing only on the base of the Family,\nyet represent a broadening of this base insofar as the notion of the\nfamily is first enlarged into the institution of a Tribe, and then this\ninstitution cannot always refuse to take in foreign elements (prisoners\nof war, or clients claiming protection). The nomadic stage is in its\nelement in constant wandering from pasture to pasture, in unceasing\nchange of residence; and is accordingly completed, whether with regard\nto its intrinsic character or to the experience of history, by passing\nover to the stage of the stationary agriculturist. The gathering of wild\nfruits, by which huntsmen and primitive nomads find some vegetable\nnourishment, forms the first impulse to pass over to an agricultural\nlife, as Waitz observes.[121] It must be noticed that a pastoral life is\nfrequently combined with tillage. The Nomad\u2019s relation to nature is a\nvery different one from the Agriculturist\u2019s. But the consciousness of\nunion among men\u2014of their belonging to one another\u2014was first excited at\nthe nomadic stage; and it is therefore not surprising if a large\nproportion of the names of nations point back to that age.\n\nA nation calls itself by a common name when the consciousness of the\nunion of its members first arises. Names in which the nation confesses\nitself to be a wandering, restless society, point back to the nomadic\nstage of civilisation. That the contemplation of their own wandering\nmode of life, is with the nomadic peoples one motive for the national\nappellation, is shown in many instances which Bergmann has correctly\nexplained in this sense.[122] The Kurdic nomadic tribes still call\nthemselves _K\u00f6tsher_, i.e. \u2018wandering,\u2019 and despise and persecute their\nsettled brethren.[123] The national appellation of the Zulus denotes the\n\u2018homeless,\u2019 \u2018roaming.\u2019[124] According to the etymological explanation\ngiven by an old Hebraist, Clericus, the name of one of the peoples which\nare mentioned as aborigines of Canaan, the Z\u00fbz\u00eem, is to be referred to\nthis notion; it is so if we can cite for its explanation the late Hebrew\n_z\u00fbz_, \u2018to move from place to place.\u2019[125] Another Canaanite national\nname, Perizz\u00ee, also according to many expositors points to nomadic\nlife.[126] The name P\u00fb\u1e6d, by which the Egyptians called many nomadic\ntribes that came into their country, and which is also given in the list\nof nations in Gen. X. as the name of a son of Ham, likewise belongs to\nthe same class. From their wandering life they were called by the\nEgyptians the \u2018Runners,\u2019 and the graphical power of the name is shown in\nthe hieroglyphs by the picture of the quickfooted hare.[127] The name of\nthe Hebrews also, \u02bfIbhr\u00eem, belongs to the same series; it denotes \u2018those\nwho wander here and there,\u2019 the Nomads. For the word \u02bf\u00e2bhar, from which\nthe national name \u02bfIbhr\u00eem or Hebrews is derived, denotes not merely\n_transire_, \u2018to pass through a land, or to cross a river,\u2019 but rather\n\u2018to wander about\u2019 in general; for which sense many Hebrew texts might be\nquoted. The Assyrian is instructive on the point; there the phonetically\ncorresponding verb is used of the sun, which _i-bar-ru-u kib-ra-a-ti_\n\u2018marches, wanders through the lands.\u2019[128] A similar wandering through\nvarious lands is the foundation of the appellation \u02bfIbhr\u00eem \u2018Hebrews,\u2019 so\nthat it denotes \u2018the Wanderers here and there,\u2019 the Nomad-people.[129]\nIn opposition to these national names others are formed, which speak of\nthe sedentary mode of life; a name of this kind is that of the South\nArabian people Jo\u1e33\u1e6d\u00e2n, which, as Freytag conjectured,[130] comes from\n\u1e33a\u1e6dana \u2018to take up a fixed abode.\u2019[131]\n\nWe must not overlook the fact that such national names as these, derived\nfrom and referring to a certain stage of life and civilisation, are\npreserved by the same nation, even when that stage has been long passed.\nWe see this most clearly in the case of the Philistines, who lived\nchiefly in towns, and preserved not even a tradition to remind them of a\nformer nomadic life. Yet their name Pelishtim is itself a reminiscence\nof this kind. Whether the name is to be combined with the Semitic\n(Ethiopic) palasha \u2018to wander,\u2019 as most of the Semitic philologists\nsay,[132] or is to be explained from the Aryan, as others say; in either\ncase it is a living witness and reminiscence of the nomadic stage of the\nPhilistine people, at which they gave themselves this name. Similarly\nthe Accadians still called themselves by that name, which means\n\u2018Highlanders,\u2019 long after they had chosen a new habitation in the\nplains.[133]\n\nThe herdsman finds his happiness in the well-being of his herds; his\nwealth depends on the quality of the pasture which he can get for them;\nto seek this is the constant object of his endless wanderings. Good,\nfresh, sound pasture is the sum of his modest wishes: \u2018green pastures\nbeside still waters,\u2019 as a Hebrew Psalmist (Ps. XXIII. 2) expresses it.\nThe cloudy heaven, which sends rain to his fields, is in his eyes a most\nfriendly element, to which he gladly gives the victory over the\nscorching glow of the sun, which dries up his pastures. The nomad calls\nhimself \u2018Son of the water of heaven,\u2019 i.e. the rain. \u2018By ban\u00fb m\u00e2 al-sam\u00e2\n(Sons of Rain),\u2019 says an Arabic commentator on Muslim\u2019s collection of\ntraditions, \u2018the Arabs are to be understood.... For as the greater part\nof them are owners of herds, they supported themselves mainly by the\ngoodness of the pastures.\u2019[134] Thus this appellation \u2018Sons of the water\nof heaven\u2019 could then come to have the general meaning \u2018rich people,\u2019 as\ne.g. in a sensible verse of \u02bfAnbar b. Sam\u00e2k:[135]\n\n fal\u00e2 tathi\u1e33an min-an-nauka bishay\u02bein\n walau k\u00e2n\u00fb ban\u00ee m\u00e2\u02bfi-s-sam\u00e2\u02bfi:\n\n \u2018Confide thou not in anything in fools,\n E'en were they _sons of water of the heaven_,\u2019\n\ni.e. however rich they might be. The Bedaw\u00ee of Somali, Isa, call their\nOgas, i.e. chief, by the name _Roblai_, which, according to Burton,\ndenotes Prince of the Rain.[136]\n\nThe nomad must be constantly wandering and seeking good pasture, if he\nis to gain a comfortable position. The glowing heat of the sun is in\nthis respect his terrible enemy and continual adversary.\n\nThe starry heaven by night and the moon he recognises as his friends and\nprotectors; and he gladly welcomes the moment when these guardians\novercome the enemy, and drive off the beaming sun, when noon is followed\nby afternoon, and the evening comes on with its cool breeze, on the\ntrack of the departed solar heat. Then he is delivered from the tiresome\n\u1e33ail, \u2018midday sleep,\u2019 which the noon-day heat had brought on. He\ntherefore likes best to begin his journey in the afternoon, and\ncontinues it till night or during the night.[137] \u2018In their journeys and\nexpeditions with caravans or for plunder,\u2019 says Sprenger of the Arabs,\n\u2018they generally travel during the night. When one rides on a camel at a\nslow pace through the monotonous desert, the nights seem very long. But\nthe heart is filled with quiet delight by the stillness of the night and\nthe enjoyment of the fresh air, and the eye involuntarily looks upwards.\nHence we find even in the \u1e32or\u00e2n and in the poetry of the Bedaw\u00ee frequent\nallusion to the starry heaven and its motion.\u2019[138] The caravan-songs\n(\u1e25id\u00e2h) accordingly refer mainly to night-travelling, as e.g. one quoted\nby Wetzstein:\n\n O how journey we, while dew is scattered out\n And desert-dust bedecks the lips of sumpter beasts.\n O how journey we, while townsmen sleep\n With limbs involved in coverlets;[139]\n\nand when he travels by day he follows the course of the clouds, seeking\ncoolness and shade. The Arabic poet Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 al-Ma\u02bfarr\u00ee, who, like all\nthe later writers of \u1e33a\u1e63\u00eed\u00e2s,[140] makes the horizon of Beduin life the\nbackground of his poetry, says somewhere of his beloved,\n\n As though the cloud were her lover, she always turns her saddle\n To the quarter where the cloud is moving;\n\nand the scholiast observes on the passage, \u2018that is, she is a Beduin,\nand the Bedaw\u00ee always follow the rain and the places where raindrops\nfall from heaven.\u2019[141] The old Arabian poet wishes for rain also on the\ngrave of his friend; he cannot bear to see it scorched by the sun\u2019s\nheat. \u2018Drench, O clouds, the earth of that grave!\u2019 is a frequently\nrecurring formula in the old Arabic poetry; and the later poetry, with\nits imitation of old forms, has received this phrase into its\ninventory.[142] It is connected with this preference of the nomads for\nthe heavens by night, that Hind, daughter of \u02bfOtb\u00e2, says on the day of\nthe battle of O\u1e25od to the Koreyshites, the opponents of Isl\u00e2m: \u2018We are\nthe daughters of the Star,\u2019 (na\u1e25nu bin\u00e2t \u1e6c\u00e2ri\u1e33),[143] thereby claiming\ndescent for herself also from the nightly heaven. We put this\nexclamation of the brave Arab woman in the same category with the\nabove-mentioned reference of the origin of the Arabs to the Rain, and\nconsider ourselves justified in rejecting the explanation given by\nal-Jauhar\u00ee, who finds in it a simile, with the sense, \u2018Our father excels\nothers in nobility of birth, as that brilliant star excels the other\nstars.\u2019[144] It is then quite indifferent which star \u1e6c\u00e2ri\u1e33 is, whether\nthe morning star, according to most lexicographers, or Zo\u1e25al, (Saturn,\nor another of the five Chunnas-stars),[145] as al-Bai\u1e0d\u00e2w\u00ee explains\nit.[146] The point lies only in the fact that the Arab woman calls\nherself \u2018Star\u2019s daughter;\u2019 and this designation falls into the same\ncategory with Ban\u00fb Badr \u2018Sons of the Full Moon,\u2019 Ban\u00fb Hil\u00e2l \u2018Sons of the\nNew Moon,\u2019 adopted by some Arabian tribes, and compared even by\nBochart[147] with the name of the people Jerah.[148] Thus also several\nclans of Arabian tribes, especially the Ban\u00fb Tem\u00eem, Ban\u00fb \u1e0cabb\u00e2, and Ban\u00fb\nAzd called themselves \u2018Sons of Night,\u2019 (Ban\u00fb \u1e62ar\u00eem).[149] On the other\nhand, the townsman of Mecca called himself \u2018Child of the Sun,\u2019\u2014a name\nwhich has survived to the present time, as is to be seen from an\ninteresting communication of Kremer.[150]\n\nThe relation of the Agriculturist to the two warring elements of the sky\nis very different. Storm, wind, and excessive rain are the declared\nenemies of his life, whereas the warm sun\u2019s rays, which heat and bring\nto perfection the fruits of the field, are gladly welcomed by him, and\ntheir victory over the dark gloomy sky gives him joy. An old Hellenic\nname of the sun is _Zeus Talaios_, or _Tallaios_, or simply _Talos_,\nwhich denotes \u2018encouraging growth,\u2019 as has been proved long ago.[151] It\nis Zeus who watches the cornfields and sends bountiful harvests;[152]\nand even clouds and rain are connected with him, insofar as their powers\nare beneficial to the agriculturist. For this reason Zeus himself\nbecomes the \u03bd\u03b5\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1, the Thunderer and Rain-giver.[153] This\nvariety of relation to nature will be found reflected in the myths\nformed at these two stages respectively. The altered relation to\nexternal nature works a change even in the old and already fully formed\nmyths, and lays down for them a new tendency in accordance with the\naltered conception of nature. Thus the myth which was already formed at\nan earlier stage of civilisation frequently still possesses enough power\nof resistance to preserve, in spite of adaptation to new views, much of\nthe character formerly impressed on it by a past stage of civilisation.\nBut the new myth must bear only the impress of the new stage at which\nits existence begins. For as the capacity for creating language does not\nexhaust all its force at once, but still continues to form new modes of\nspeech whenever an alteration of circumstances demands them, so it is\nwith myths. As the agriculturist creates new words for his new\ncircumstances and ideas, so also he creates new myths.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. What therefore especially distinguishes the Nomad\u2019s myth from the\nAgriculturist\u2019s is mainly referable to the different position occupied\nat these two stages by the dark night-sky on the one hand and the\nbrilliant, warm, sunny sky on the other. The myth is not a merely\n_objective_[154] expression for the phenomena of nature. For what is\nordinarily and in common life called purely objective description, is\nalmost an impossibility, seeing that no one with all possible exertion,\nrestraint and self-abnegation can put off all his individuality; and\nthis is true, in a much higher degree, of the myth. It is incorrect to\nspeak of objective reporters or historians. For how would it be possible\nfor me, giving a report on an event, whether as eye-witness or as\ncritical sifter of the statements of others, to speak of it without\nbeing _myself the Speaker_? And the single fact that _I_ am the speaker,\nimpresses on my report a different stamp from that which the report of\nanother would have borne. Compare so-called objective historical\nnarratives from different decads\u2014not to speak of hundreds or thousands\nof years. How much more must the subjectivity of the myth-creators be\nimpressed on the myths of different periods of civilisation! Now it is\nundoubtedly true that the special, sharply characteristic intellectual\nindividuality of persons is only developed in direct proportion with the\nadvance of the culture of the mind. The more education a man has, the\nmore can he give expression to his inner self and make its influence\nfelt; and with the advance of education, the just claims of\nIndividuality will also receive more and more attention, both in society\nand in law. This process can be traced upwards from animals of low\norganisation to man, and within the human race can be confirmed through\nits various stages of development, geographical and historical. At the\nmyth-creating stage, intellectual uniformity prevails almost\nuniversally, in all individuals. Consequently here only the sum total of\nthe men who are creating language and myth has any power; the individual\ncould not effect anything of his own, different from the work of others.\nThere is no such thing as either language or myth of a single\nindividual;[155] and what Steinthal says in reference to national songs,\nis equally true of both of them, that the mind which produces them, \u2018is\nthe mind of a multitude of persons without individuality, held together\nby physical and mental relationship; and whatever is mentally produced\nby this multitude is a creation of the common mind, i.e. of the\nnation.\u2019[156] And just for this reason the common mind in each of the\nvarious epochs of civilisation has its own characteristic impress, a\ntendency and fundamental conception, which distinguish it from those of\nthe preceding epoch.\n\nAmong the Nomads, then, the dark, cloudy heaven of night is the\nsympathetic mythical figure; they imagine it conquering, or if it is\novercome, give to its fall a tragic character, so that it falls lamented\nand worthy rather of victory than of ruin; and the Nomad\u2019s grief for the\ndefeated power is propagated from age to age far beyond the mythical\nperiod. The sacrifice of Jephthah\u2019s daughter is still lamented from time\nto time by the daughters of Israel. It is just the reverse with the myth\nof the Agriculturist. He makes the brilliant heaven of day-time conquer,\nand the gloomy cloudy heaven or the dark night fall; he accompanies the\nvictory of the warm heaven of the day with cries of triumph and\napplause, and his hymns immortalise what he felt and thought on this\nvictory. Here it is the defeat of the sunny heaven that attunes him to\nlamentation. The fallen Samson is a tragical figure. Every reader will\nbe able himself to supply the application of these general propositions\nto the myth of the Hebrews, if he pays attention to the chapter in which\nthe chief figures of the Hebrew mythology were brought forward, with the\nchief traits by which they are accompanied in Mythology. I should deem\nit superfluous to prosecute this application further, as it is to be\nfound in every case in the nature of the myth itself.\n\nBut it is not only from a feeling of sympathy towards the heaven of\nnight and clouds that the Nomad puts it in the foreground. This aspect\nof heaven is to him also the _datum_, the _prius_, the _natural_, which\nthe heaven of day afterwards opposes as foe and persecutor. With the\nnature of Nomadism, and especially of the night-wanderings, is also\nconnected the Reckoning of time by _Nights_. This has been best\npreserved by the Arabs, who count by nights, instead of days, as we do.\nIt is especially marked in the determination of the distance between two\nplaces and of the length of a journey: e.g. \u2018His face perspires with\ndesire for the payment held back for _long nights_ (i.e. for a long\ntime);\u2019[157] \u2018Between Damascus and the place where Wal\u00eed b. Yaz\u00eed lived\nin the desert are _four nights_;\u2019[158] \u2018I will give him five hundred\nd\u00een\u00e2rs and a camel, on which he can travel for _twelve nights_;\u2019[159] in\na poem of Ab\u00fb Zeyd al-\u02bfAbsham\u00ee, \u2018When the tribe travels for _sixteen\nnights_\u2019 (i\u1e0fa-l-\u1e33aumu s\u00e2rat sittat \u02bfashrata leylatan).[160] This Arabic\nidiom is so firmly established that in the opposite case, when a period\nis for once to be expressed in days, the equivalent expressed in nights\nis added as a more exact definition; e.g. \u2018So that there lay between\nthem and their home a distance of _two days or three nights_.\u2019[161] With\nthe reckoning of time by nights two other practices are connected.\n_First_, the Night has priority before the Day; therefore among the\nArabs and the Hebrews (as also among the later Jews), the two peoples\nwhich, as we shall see, preserved the feeling of nomadism longer than\nthe Aryans, the day begins with the evening. \u2018There was evening, there\nwas morning\u2014one day.\u2019 A residuum of the old nomadic conception is found\nin the Egyptian myth that Thum, the form of the sun\u2019s nocturnal\nexistence, was born before Ra, the sun\u2019s form by day. _Secondly_,\nchronology is thereby connected chiefly with the nocturnal heaven and\nthe moon. It is to be observed on this subject that in nations which\nbegin to count the day from the evening, the moon is the central figure\nand the starting point in the chronology of greater periods.[162]\nSeyffarth, in an essay entitled, \u2018Did the Hebrews before the Destruction\nof Jerusalem reckon by lunar months?\u2019 (published in 1848 in the\n_Zeitschrift der D.M.G._, II. 347 sqq.), endeavoured to defend the\nthesis that the Hebrew chronology was originally founded on solar\nmonths, which were not supplanted by lunar months till between the\nsecond and fourth century after Christ; but he supports this theory by\narguments which cannot stand against profounder criticism. It must\nrather be assumed that the original lunar year at the beginning of\nagricultural life was united with the observation of the solar periods\n(see Knobel, _Commentary on Exodus_, p.95), so as to produce very early\ncompensation of the difference between them; but that in the various\nattempts at compensation, which ended with the fixing of the calendar\nand the arrangement of the intercalary month, the reckoning by moons\nremained in the foreground, as is evident in the mode of compensation.\nIn reference to the Arabs also, Sprenger has fully proved in the essay\nto which we have already referred in this chapter, that the solar\nelement of chronology was subordinate, and that in the old times before\nMo\u1e25ammed the lunar reckoning was in force.\n\nAs on another occasion we shall recur to the fact that among the Aryans\nthe Indians retained a certain degree of nomadic sentiment more\ndistinctly than any other Aryans, and that this is impressed on their\nliterature and on many of their institutions, so here we may observe the\nsame in reference to their chronology. In the Vedas, the oldest\nliterature of the Sanskrit people, we find the lunar year of twelve\nmonths, with the occasional addition of a thirteenth or intercalary\nmonth.[163] It is remarkable that on this subject we find still more\nreminiscences of the nomadic life among the Persians. In the whole book\nof Avesta, in passages where the shining heavenly bodies are enumerated,\nthey appear in this invariable order: Stars, Moon, and Sun, the sun\nalways occupying the last place. And we even find also the reckoning of\ntime by nights exactly as it is among the Arabs; which enables Spiegel\nto draw the just inference that the ancient Persians reckoned by lunar\nyears.[164] According to Bunsen[165] the Delphic myth of the\npurification of Apollo likewise points to the conclusion that the\nHellenes in later times substituted the solar for the old lunar\nchronology.\n\nThe Solar chronology belongs to the Agriculturist, in opposition to the\nNomad. As the night and the nocturnal sky forms the foreground to the\nnomad, so the agricultural stage of civilisation leads the sun to\nvictory, and the sun becomes the measure and the starting point of its\nchronology. With the advance to agriculture the lunar year is superseded\nby the _Magnus Annus_, or \u1f21\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, which was also called \u1f41 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2. Yet very curiously, as the remains of nomadism in general may\nbe long visible and be unconsciously perpetuated in the ideas of the\nagriculturist, it is the mode of calculating time that echoes the\nnomadic ideas the longest, and even survives in ages of more advanced\nculture. Of the Gauls, e.g., Julius Caesar reports that they counted by\nnights, not by days.[166] Tacitus says the same of the ancient\nGermans.[167] In one case, namely in the English word \u2018fortnight,\u2019[168]\nwhich is a speaking proof that the ancestors of those who now use the\nword reckoned time by nights, one of the most advanced nations of the\npresent time has not yet left off counting by nights. Other languages\nalso, spoken by nations which have long accepted the solar reckoning,\npreserve memorials of the old nomadic lunar reckoning. In Hungarian and\nother languages of the Ugric stock the expression \u2018hopping year\u2019 (sz\u00f6k\u0151\n\u00e9v) for leap-year,[169] in connexion with other similar phenomena,\npoints to a chronology of lunar years, as the Hungarian Academician Paul\nHunfalvy has very fully demonstrated, with important documents.[170] The\nresiduum of the lunar chronology which has stood the longest, and which,\ndespite the generally preponderating solar character of our reckoning of\ntime, and despite the love of a decimal system inherent in the first\nFrench Revolution, is now fixed firmly for a long future period, is the\n_Week_\u2014a notion specifically connected with the Moon. Yet it has long\nbeen made evident that even this division of the month into four weeks\nwas in antiquity sometimes exchanged for a solar division into three\ndecads. This was due to the influence of the agricultural stage of\ncivilisation giving prominence to the Sun. We know this, e.g., of the\nEgyptians, and it was therefore long doubted whether they knew the\ndivision into weeks at all. But Sir Gardner Wilkinson collected a series\nof proofs that among the Egyptians the later system of decads was\nhistorically preceded by the division of the months into four weeks of\nseven days each.[171] It is also tolerably certain of the Mexicans, that\nof their two methods of reckoning time, which in later times were in\nforce side by side, the _Tonulpohualli_ or \u2018solar reckoning\u2019 and the\n_Metzlapohualli_ or \u2018lunar reckoning,\u2019 the latter was historically the\nearlier, but was retained in the time of the solar chronology, as is so\nfrequently the case in computations of time.[172] We ought, moreover,\nalso to consider the computation of longer periods of time by _Masika_,\ni.e. rainy seasons, which prevails among the Unyamwesi in Africa.[173]\nHow powerful is the posthumous influence even on later times of the\nnomadic lunar division into weeks,\u2014an influence which again and again\nobtained validity, even after it had been once supplanted by the solar\nreckoning by decads, we see best among the Romans. They had originally a\nconsistent lunar computation; even their year consisted of ten months,\nthe sun\u2019s cycle of twelve months being ignored; and they divided the\nmonth into four weeks.[174] Later, this fourfold division gave way to a\nthreefold division into three decads, _nonae_, _kalendae_, _idus_; but\nyet they returned at last to the week again, and called its seven days\nby the names of the sun, the moon and the five planets. However, the\ndivision of the month into three decads is not always connected with\nsolar chronology; it is also found in combination with lunar reckoning,\nwhen three phases of the moon are acknowledged (as in the three-headed\nforms of the moon in the Greek mythology).[175]\n\nA _five-days\u2019_ period has been proved to exist in many nations as the\nequivalent of our week (among the Chinese, Mongol tribes, Azteks, and\nMexicans.)[176] But this division into pentads must be connected with an\noriginal quinary system of numeration, to the linguistic importance of\nwhich Pott has devoted a special treatise.[177] In Old Calabar on the\nwest coast of Africa a week of _eight days_ occurs; most curiously, as\nthe people cannot count beyond five.[178] _A priori_ this would seem\nimpossible; but it is vouched for by an observer so accurate as Bastian.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. As the Nomadic stage of civilisation of necessity historically\nprecedes the Agricultural, so also that stage of the myths at which the\nnocturnal, dark or cloudy heaven has precedence of the bright heaven of\nday comes before the stage at which the latter occupies the foreground\nand plays the part of a beloved figure or favourite. Moreover, it cannot\nbe assumed that this second stage of the formation of myths has grown up\nwithout being preceded by the first stage; for it is simply impossible\nthat any portion of mankind should have lived through the stage of\nNomadism, which perhaps lasted for thousands of years, without having\nthrown its conceptions of the world into mythic forms. Everyone knows,\nand no one now doubts, that the most prominent figure in the mythology\nof the Aryans, which later at the theological stage took the rank of a\nsupreme god, was the brilliant sunny heaven, Dyu (Dyaus, _nom._), \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2,\nZeus, on whom the powerful sympathy of the Aryan was concentrated, and\nto whom he turned with admiring devotion as soon as he began to pray and\ncompose hymns. On the other hand, it could not escape the notice of the\ninquirer on the domain of Aryan mythology and history of religion, that\nthe very oldest and most genuine representative of the Aryan mind seems\nitself to form a sort of exception to this universal idea. The Indians,\nnamely, among whom Dyu certainly was elevated to theological\nimportance,[179] do not make him their supreme god, but Indra, who, as\nhis very name shows, (indu = \u2018a drop\u2019) is identical with the rainy sky\n(Jupiter pluvius),[180] and Varu\u1e47a, who, in contrast to the shining\nMitra, was the gloomy night-sky (from var = \u2018to cover\u2019).[181] Max\nM\u00fcller, whose merit it mainly is to have raised the Aryan Dyu to the\nhigh throne which he now occupies in the history of Aryan religion,\nexplains this strange fact by supposing that Indra drove Dyu, the oldest\nof the gods, from the place which he had formerly held even among the\nIndians. \u2018If in India,\u2019 he thinks, \u2018Dyu did not grow to the same\nproportions as Zeus in Greece, the reason is simply that _dyu_ retained\nthroughout too much of its appellative power,[182] and that Indra, the\nnew name and the new god, absorbed all the channels that could have\nsupported the life of Dyu,\u2019[183] so that he died away.\n\nFrom what has been explained above, it is evident that the subject might\npresent itself in a different light. It is well known that the people of\nIndia represents, both in its language and in its mythology, the oldest\nstage of the Aryan mind attainable by us, and after it follows the\npeople of Iran. The ancient literature of these two nations, but that of\nthe Indians more than that of the Persians, stands much nearer in its\nideas to the nomadic life than any other documents of the Aryan mind\nwhich have been preserved to us. It is then no wonder if (it being a\nrule in all physical as well as intellectual development, that at a\nlater stage of progress residua of a previous one remain behind\nunnoticed) these nations, which at the time of their oldest known\nintellectual productions were not far removed from nomadism, exhibit\nmore traces of nomadism than others, even if they be found to have then\nfully passed out of the nomadic stage. We have already referred to this\nin treating of the nomadic elements in chronology, and now return again\nto the same point. In some things the Iranians preserved the traditions\nof nomadism more firmly and persistently than the Indians, who generally\nstood nearer to the original forms. This is to be explained from the\nfact that in Persia nomadism itself lived longer as an actual stage of\ncivilisation, and was more fostered, than in India; for indeed it even\nnow maintains its position there. For just as in the time of Herodotus\n(I. 125) the Persians were partly migratory nomads (\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2), partly\nsettled agriculturists (\u1f00\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2), so now a proportion, varying from a\nquarter to a half, of the population of modern Persia still leads a\nnomadic life.[184] One characteristic of the nomadic period is a social\nand political division into tribes, which in many civilised nations is\nretained into the time of fixed dwellings as a residuum of nomadism.\nWithout pausing over the Thracians, who according to the account of\nHerodotus,[185] found it impossible to throw off all reference to\ntribe-differences and bring their power to bear through national unity,\nwe will refer to the Ionians as an example, whose divisions into\n\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7, and \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, have been accurately traced.[186] Now\namong the Indians we find no trace of tribal divisions worth mentioning,\nbut very soon come across the Caste\u2014an hereditary division according to\nmodes of occupation, which cannot be formed at any earlier stage than\nthat of fixed dwellings, since this gave the first impulse to the\npractice of arts and trades, which is not conceivable at the nomadic\nstage. Among the Iranians, on the other hand, the tribal division\nmaintained itself for a long time parallel with that according to\noccupation, which was better suited to the time of transition to a fixed\nlife.[187] Even on the Caste system of the Parsees the tribal division\nstill exerts a definite influence. The sacerdotal caste is a distinct\ntribe, a family, just like the Levites among the Hebrews;[188] and in\nancient times many sacerdotal functions, \u2018the smaller and less important\nreligious duties, were assigned to the heads of the various subdivisions\nof the tribe.\u2019 The name of the priests, m\u00f4bed (which Spiegel explains as\num\u00e2na-pa\u00efti = \u2018chief head of the tribe or family,\u2019 perhaps equivalent to\nthe Hebrew r\u00f4sh b\u00eath \u00e2bh), in itself indicates the original universality\nof the bestowal of the sacerdotal functions on the head of the\ntribe.[189]\n\nAs in Iran a fundamental social institution, so among the Sanskrit\npeople a prominent mythological fact is the notable residuum of\nnomadism: viz. the fact that by them the first seat and highest rank\namong the figures of the myth and subsequently among the gods is\nassigned not to Dyu, but to Varu\u1e47a and Indra. It is not to the\nfield-guarding, harvest-sending, shining sunny heaven, but to Varu\u1e47a the\ncoverer and Indra the rain-sender, that the nomad directs his admiration\nand sympathy, his veneration and devotion. This relation towards Indra\nwas preserved by the Indian from the nomadic period\u2014from a time before\nthat remarkable people had chosen a permanent abode on the banks of the\nGanges and Indus. With this agrees very well the idea which Roth worked\nout in an essay on \u2018the highest gods of the Aryan peoples,\u2019 that Varu\u1e47a\nis as old as the Aryan period, and is the common property of all members\nof the race; even the conception of Indra being later than that of\nVaru\u1e47a, and specially Indian.[190] But it is not only among the Indians\nthat we find this memory of nomadic life impressed on the mythology; its\ntraces may be found also in the Hellenic mythology, not however as a\npositive, actual existence, as in India, but still as an historical\nreminiscence. According to Hesiod\u2019s _Theogony_, the dominion of Zeus was\npreceded by that of Uranus; i.e. before the Hellenic people, choosing a\nsettled agricultural life, brought Zeus, the bright sunny heaven, into\nthe foreground, the centre of their world was Uranus (Varu\u1e47a), the\ngloomy overclouded sky. There is scarcely any serious reason for\nregarding, as Bunsen[191] and some writers on the history of religion\ndo, the kingdom of Zeus alone as an original intellectual product of the\nHellenic people, and putting aside Uranus as merely a result of\nTheogonic speculation, or for even seeing in Uranus a figure borrowed\nfrom a Semitic source. The succession\u2014Uranus, Zeus\u2014rather corresponds\nperfectly with the successive stages of civilisation, nomadism and\nagriculture, and all that Hesiod did was to clothe an historical,\nnatural and true tradition of the Hellenic people in the form of a\ntheogonic story. With this, other points of the Theogony seem to be\nclearly and unmistakably connected, namely those in which we perceive\nthe idea of the priority of the Night. Among the powers preceding the\nrule of Zeus in Hesiod\u2019s _Theogony_, _Chaos_ is named\u2014a word signifying\naccording to its original sense \u2018darkness\u2019\u2014and _Tartarus_. We well know\nthe theological meaning of the latter word\u2014the subterranean place to\nwhich the souls of the dead go; but there is no doubt that it originally\ndenoted \u2018a gloomy pit, never lighted by the sun,\u2019 or \u2018darkness\u2019 in\ngeneral. Therefore Tartarus figures in Mythology as father of Typhon and\nEchidna, and therefore Nyx is his daughter. Then it agrees well with\nnomadic ideas that Tartarus is called \u2018father of waters and springs,\u2019\nand that he bears the epithet \u2018the first born\u2019 (\u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2). On Hebrew\nground also we meet a similar transition. In Job XXXVI. 20, the word\nlayl\u00e2 \u2018night\u2019 is used quite in the sense of \u2018nether world;\u2019 which is\ntrue also of \u1e63alm\u00e2weth, denoting \u2018darkness\u2019 in general, and used only\nsecondarily with special reference to Orcus.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. We have above just touched the confines of religious history,\nthough it was strictly speaking, only a border territory of Mythology,\nwhich ought not to be confounded with religious history. But we must\nhere allow ourselves an excursion into the neighbouring territory. For\nit ought not to pass unnoticed that, as the myth which has the night-sky\nin its foreground always precedes that which has the bright sky of day\nin its centre, the former corresponding to the nomadic, the latter to\nthe settled agricultural life, the same sequence can also be observed in\nthe history of religion. There are nations, which, when already standing\nat the nomadic stage, work out for themselves a theistic religion. As\ntheistic religion always grows up out of the elements of myths, the\nreligion of Nomadism must be essentially a worship of the night-heaven.\nThen, when the progress to the agricultural stage works the revolution\nin man\u2019s ideas of the world, and in the relation of his mind to external\nnature, of which I spoke above, when he cleaves more to the Sun and pays\nhis reverence to him, then the worship of the nocturnal starry or\noverclouded rainy heaven is naturally supplanted by one of the diurnal\nheaven and the sun, and only residua of the ancient ideas and the\nancient objects of worship are propagated into the new epoch, sometimes\ncontinuing and remaining in force unmodified, and sometimes interpreted\nanew in the sense of the new system. The religion and the worship of the\nnomad stand to those of the agriculturist in the same relation of\nhistorical succession as the two similar stages of mythology to each\nother. At the later stage, the elements of solar religion can\nundoubtedly stand peacefully side by side with the residua of the\nearlier stage of religion. Similarly, when nomads have relations with\ntownsmen who have a solar religion already powerfully developed, many\nelements of the solar worship may find their way into the nomadic\nreligion; of which the well-known accounts of the religion of some\nArabic Beduin tribes furnish plenty of examples. To this an outside\nobserver may probably reduce the report brought by William Gifford\nPalgrave, the daring explorer of Central Arabia, of the adoration of the\nSun among the Bedaw\u00ee.[192] But in the order of genesis the worship of\nthe night-sky, inclusive of that of the moon, precedes that of the\nday-sky and the sun. It was observed long ago that wherever sun-worship\nexists, moon-worship also is always to be found, being a residuum of the\nearlier stage of religion; but not in the reverse order.[193] We shall\nhave to revert in a subsequent chapter to this fact, in speaking of the\nreligion of the nomadic Hebrews, and will therefore only refer to a few\npoints in the ancient Arabic religion. If Blau is right in interpreting\nthe old Arabic proper name \u02bfAbd Duhm\u00e2n as \u2018Servant of the Darkness of\nNight,\u2019[194] the theological importance of the night-sky to the ancient\nArabs in general is proved; for it is well known that in Arabic proper\nnames compounded with \u02bfAbd \u2018servant\u2019 the second member of the compound\nis a god\u2019s name, or at least a name of theological meaning.[195] To the\nsame class belongs the Moon-worship of the ancient Arabs, which is\nsufficiently attested.[196] The clearest evidence of a worship of the\nrainy sky and the storm among the Arabs is furnished by the name \u1e32uza\u1e25,\nto which storms and rainbows were attributed (see the following chapter\n\u00a7 12). Arabian etymologists, among whom may be mentioned the author of\nthe \u1e32\u00e2m\u00fbs and the author of the Supercommentary on that dictionary,\npublishing at B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33, have tried many combinations in order to find a\nsuitable explanation of this \u1e32uza\u1e25, with especial reference to the\nmeaning \u2018rainbow;\u2019 all the derivative significations of the root \u1e33z\u1e25,\n_embellishment_, _variety of colour_, _lifting oneself_, are brought\nforward to yield a sufficient ground for the appellation. This proves\nhow little the Mohammedan now knows of his heathen antiquity; the use of\nthe name \u1e32uza\u1e25 must have been interdicted. Al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee, in his work Almas\u00e2\n\u02beil al-manth\u00fbr\u00e2, finds a deep-seated error in the word itself, instead\nof which he wishes to read kaza\u02bf with _\u02bfayn_, with the meaning\n\u2018cloud.\u2019[197] But it is probable that this name \u1e32uza\u1e25 is derived from\nthe signification \u2018mingere,\u2019 which belongs to the corresponding verb\n(used specially of beasts), and that it is due to a mythological\nconception of the Rain. This circumstance tempts us to connect the\nHebrew word b\u00fbl \u2018rain, rainy month\u2019 with the Arabic b\u00e2la, yab\u00fblu\n\u2018mingere.\u2019 If so, the combination of this word with the name of the God\nBa\u02bfal, which certainly does occur in Himyaric in the form B\u00fbl, must have\nbeen made later, from a misunderstanding of the mythological\nrelations.[198] The theological power of \u1e32uza\u1e25 among the ancient Arabs\nis evident as well from its being explained by Moslem interpreters as\nthe name of a devil or angel, as also from the fact that geographical\nappellations which are in force in the ritual of the old religion are\nconnected with it.[199] These elements of the worship of the night and\nthe cloudy and stormy sky must have priority before those of the solar\nworship which are found subsisting beside them. F. Spiegel states this\nsuccession to be a law in the history of religion. \u2018It is not the sun,\u2019\nhe says,[200] \u2018that first attracted the attention of the savage by its\nlight.... On the other hand, the night-sky, whose lights form a contrast\nto the darkness of the earth, is much more calculated to attract the\ngaze of the savage to itself. And among the heavenly lights it is the\nmoon that first absorbs the sight, as well from its size as from its\nreadily discernible changes; and after it a group of particularly\nbrilliant stars.... We find moon-worship among almost utterly savage\ntribes in Africa and America; and it is noteworthy that there the moon\nis always treated as a man, the sun as a woman; not till later are these\nrelations inverted. From this we may infer that _the lunar worship is\nolder than the solar_.\u2019 We cannot, however, agree with Spiegel when he\ngives as the reason why darkness attracted the special attention of man,\nthat the sun was to him a matter of course. We see the same story of the\nlunar religion repeat itself again in the history of the\nBabylonian-Assyrian religion. HUR-KI (Assyrian SIN) is historically the\nolder and earliest prominent object of worship of the ancient Accadian\nkingdom; and the further we advance towards the beginnings of the\nhistory, the more does the worship of the moon preponderate. The\nmonarchs of the first dynasties regard her as their protector, and the\nname of the moon often enters into composition to form their proper\nnames.[201] In the later empire, that of Assyria, this prevailing\npre-eminence of the moon gradually ceases. She is supplanted by the sun,\nunder whom she descends to be a deity of the second rank, the \u2018Lord of\nthe thirty days of the month,\u2019 and \u2018Illuminator of the earth.\u2019[202] That\nSAMAS, the sun, is called in the Assyrian epic of Istar _the son of\nSin_, the moon-god (IV. 2), \u2018points,\u2019 as the learned German interpreter\nof the cuneiform inscriptions observes, \u2018to a veneration of the moon-god\nin Babylonia earlier than that of the sun-god,\u2019[203] or else to the\nconception of the night preceding the day. Among the Egyptians, too, it\nis a later period at which the dominion of the sun is recognised. The\nolder historical epoch\u2014whether permeated, as Bunsen expresses it\nsomewhat obscurely,[204] by a \u2018_cosmogonic-astral_\u2019 idea, or, as\nLenormant describes it in a few bold strokes,[205] possessing very\nlittle positive religion at all\u2014knows as yet nothing of solar worship.\nThe solar worship of the Egyptians is undoubtedly the product of a later\ndevelopment of high culture.\n\nThis phenomenon, the priority of the lunar to the solar worship, is\nasserted also by the adherents of a theory of the history of\ncivilisation usually called the _Gynaecocratic_, which was founded and\nworked out by the Swiss savant Bachofen in a large book entitled \u2018The\nGynaecocracy of Antiquity.\u2019 To the adherents of this theory, who suppose\nthe lordship of man to have been preceded by a long period in which the\nfemale sex bore rule, the lunar worship is closely allied to the\nimportance of woman, while the solar worship is connected with the rule\nof man. I do not, of course, deem it a part of my present task to\ncriticise the Gynaecocratic theory, which has certainly had but small\nsuccess in the learned world, or to take up a position either for or\nagainst it. Yet it is satisfactory that the phenomenon in the history of\nreligion which we have brought into prominence may find confirmation in\nanother quarter, where the premisses are utterly different.\n\n\n\u00a7 5. The first founder of Comparative Mythology, Professor A. Kuhn,\nstarting from the truth \u2018that every stage of social and political growth\nhas a more or less peculiar mythological character of its own, and that\nthe fact of these, so to speak, mythological strata lying side by side\nor crossing one another often renders the solution of mythological\nenigmas more difficult,\u2019 insisted, primarily with reference to Aryan\nmythology, that the mythological products of each of the great epochs of\ncivilisation ought to be sifted with reference to the cycles of myths\npeculiar to each epoch.[206] He himself ventured on the first beginnings\nor elements of such a sifting in a very interesting and instructive\nacademical treatise \u2018On stages of development in the formation of\nMyths.\u2019[207] Kuhn finds the criterion of a myth\u2019s belonging to one or\nanother period of civilisation mainly in the notions and objects with\nwhich the myth has to do. Sun\u2019s hunts were spoken of in the hunting\nperiod, the sun\u2019s cattle in the nomadic, &c.; and the formation of myths\nwhich employed these notions commenced \u2018as soon as the following period\nhad lost the understanding of the language of the preceding\u2019 (p. 137).\n\nI do not think that a definition of the periods of myth-formation which\nstarts with the Material of the myth can always afford a strictly\nreliable rule for judging a mythic stratum and assigning it to this or\nthat period of civilisation. For it must not be left unnoticed that,\nwhen once the notion of hunting or of herds has come into existence, it\ndoes not vanish from the mental inventory of man as soon as ever the\nstage of civilisation is passed on which that portion of mankind\noccupies itself with hunting or keeping herds. On the other hand, the\nentrance of a more advanced stage of civilisation does not imply the\nutter banishment out of human society of everything connected with the\npreceding, though, speaking generally, this was now passed and gone.\nOtherwise, how could we at the present day, when the hunting age is left\nso many thousand years behind us, still have our hunting adventures and\nenjoy all the pleasures belonging to the sportsman\u2019s life? And must\nthere not be shepherds even in agricultural countries, although the\nagriculturist has long passed the stage of nomadism? Consequently, from\nthe phraseological material employed in the myth it is only possible to\ninfer the _terminus a quo_ referring to its origin, but not the\n_terminus ad quem_. Else we should be entangled in the same mistakes\ninto which the earlier Danish antiquaries fell, when from the occurrence\nof stone, bronze, or iron instruments in a tumulus or avenue, they\ninferred that the tumulus or avenue was so and so old; not considering\nthat the material of a completed period is propagated into the next\nepoch, as is shown in all those prehistorical finds in which instruments\nof all possible materials appear promiscuously, as James Fergusson has\nconvincingly proved.[208] We are in the same case with the phraseology\nof the Myth. On the ascent out of each of the great periods, the ideas\nconnected with it, which began with the entrance into it, cannot\ndisappear. The idea, having once been grasped by man, remains always\npresent to him, and can be conveniently used to give names to natural\nphenomena connected with the same circle of ideas; and he does not cease\nto take notice of natural phenomena while forming myths. Thus even the\nagriculturist may have spoken of the Sun\u2019s hunts; and even at the\nagricultural stage myths may still have arisen which spoke of the Sun as\na sportsman armed with arrows with which he slays the dragon. It is\naccordingly not the mythic material that is of the highest moment in\nsketching the chief stages of development in the formation of myths, but\nrather the _Tendency_ of the myth\u2014the position occupied by man in\nrelation to external nature, so far as appears from the myths in\nquestion. How, according to this scale of development, the stages of the\nmyth among the Aryans are reflected in their mythology, I do not presume\nto judge, being on Aryan ground only a _dilettante_. I will, however,\nquote some examples from the special ground of these studies, to\nillustrate what has been expounded. Looking at the myth of Jacob,\nobserving the centre of the cycle, whose name\u2014as is demonstrated at the\nproper place\u2014is an appellation of the starry heaven, how he strives\nagainst the _Red_, \u2018Ed\u00f4m,\u2019 and the _White_, \u2018L\u00e2bh\u00e2n,\u2019 and seeing that\nthe myth-maker\u2019s sympathy always inclines to Jacob, that his\nover-reaching of his enemies always appears in a light favourable to\nhim, and that his defeats always wear a tragic colour, I can conclude\nthat this cycle of myths belongs to Nomadism. The same inference must be\ndrawn from an examination of the myth of Joseph. But if I look at the\nhymn to Judah, or consider the myth of Samson and what the Hebrew told\nof the Sun-giant with his long locks, of his being blinded, and of his\nfall, then I know that I have to do with myths of agricultural people.\nWith regard to the antipathy felt towards the scorching sun, I will\nfinally call attention to the ideas held by the tribe of Atarantes in\nHerod. IV. 184, where it is said: \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u1ff3 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c6\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.[209]\n\n\n\u00a7 6. It is a remarkable fact in the history of the human mind that many\nnations which made the advance from the nomadic to the agricultural life\nunder the condition that either Nomadism still continues to vegetate in\nthe nation as an isolated residuum of the previous stage, or that the\nadvance affects only a part, though an influential one, of the nation,\nwhilst another equally considerable portion remains at the old stage of\ncivilisation, not only have no consciousness that the transition is an\nadvance, but even hold to a conviction that they have taken a step\ntowards what is worse, and have sunk lower by exchanging pasture for\ncrops. The nomad cherishes the proud feeling of high nobility and looks\nhaughtily down on the agriculturist bound to the clod. Even the\nhalf-savage Dinka in Central Africa, who leads a nomadic life, calls the\nagriculturist Dyoor \u2018a man of the woods,\u2019 or \u2018wild man,\u2019 and considers\nhimself more privileged and nobler.[210] Everyone who knows anything of\nthe nature and history of Arabic civilisation knows the pride of the\nBedaw\u00ee and the ironical contempt with which they look down upon the\n\u1e24a\u1e0dar\u00ee. For the Semites are especially characterised by this\ntendency.[211] The Hellenic mind is totally different. To the Hellene\nthe agricultural life only is a morally perfect condition; his poet has\ngiven expression to this feeling in the beautiful words:\u2014\n\n \u03a4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2\n \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03c6\u1f74 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c4\u03cc \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\n _\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u03af \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd; \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1_...[212]\n\nAnd to the Roman poet of a period troubled by wars peaceful agriculture\nis not only the most ideal condition of human life, but also the happy\nstate of innocence of primeval mankind:\u2014\n\n Ut _prisca gens mortalium_\n Paterna rura bobus exercet suis,\n\nsays Horace in his celebrated epode \u2018Beatus ille\u2019; and of any more\nancient period he had never heard.[213] George Rawlinson very oddly\nsays, \u2018It was a fashion among the Greeks to praise the simplicity and\nhonesty of the nomade races, who were less civilised than\nthemselves;[214] for the passages of literature quoted by him in\nconfirmation of this assertion lay no stress on the _nomadic_ element.\nBut the case is very different among the Semites. Let us first consider\nfrom this point of view the territory, richest among all those of the\nSemites, which yields the most copious evidence of the thoughts and\nfeelings of its inhabitants\u2014the Arabic. 'The Divine Glory\u2019\n(al-sak\u00eenat=shekh\u00een\u00e2) it is said, in a speech of Mo\u1e25ammed\u2019s, \u2018is among\nthe shepherds; vanity and impudence among the agriculturists\u2019\n(al-fadd\u00e2d\u00fbn).[215] Another traditional sentence, which the propagators\nof Mo\u1e25ammed\u2019s sayings\u2014certainly not Bed\u00e2w\u00ee themselves\u2014put in the mouth\nof the Prophet, is that every prophet must have been a shepherd for a\nlong time.[216] How greatly Mo\u1e25ammed approved the proud\nself-consciousness of the nomad, as opposed to the agricultural\ncharacter, is evident from the following narrative belonging to the\nIslamite Tradition. \u2018The Prophet once told this story to one of his\ncompanions in the presence of an Arab of the desert. An inhabitant of\nParadise asked All\u00e2h for permission to sow, and All\u00e2h replied, \u201cYou have\nalready all that you can want.\u201d \u201cYes,\u201d answered the other, \u201cbut yet I\nshould like also to scatter some seed.\u201d So (when All\u00e2h had given him\npermission), he scattered seeds; and in the very moment that he was\nlooking at them, he saw them grow up, stand high and become ripe for\nharvest; and they were like regular hills. Then All\u00e2h said to him \u201cAway\nfrom here, son of men; you are an insatiable creature!\u201d When the Prophet\nhad finished this story, the Arab of the desert said, \u201cBy All\u00e2h! this\nman can only have been a Kureyshite or an An\u1e63\u00e2r\u00ee, for they employ\nthemselves with sowing seed, but we Desert-Arabs are not engaged in\nsowing.\u201d Then the Prophet smiled\u2019\u2014with manifest approbation.[217] The\naccredited collections of traditions tell also the following of Ab\u00fb\nUm\u00e2m\u00e2 al-B\u00e2hil\u00ee:\u2014\u2018Once on seeing a ploughshare and another agricultural\nimplement, he said: I heard the Prophet say, \u201cThese implements do not\nenter into the house of a nation, unless that All\u00e2h causes\nlow-mindedness to enter in there at the same time.\u201d\u2019[218] So also, in\nhis political testament the Chal\u00eef \u02bfOmar when dying recommended the\nBed\u00e2w\u00ee to his successor, \u2018_for they are the root of the Arabs and the\ngerm of Isl\u00e2m_;\u2019[219] and how little this Arabian politician could\nappreciate the importance of agriculture is evident from the edict in\nwhich he most strictly forbade the Arabs to acquire landed possessions\nand practise agriculture in the conquered districts. The only mode of\nlife equally privileged with the roving nomad life was held to be the\nequally roving military profession, or life of nomads without herds and\nwith arms. Even in Egypt, a specially agricultural country, this\nprinciple was acknowledged and strictly carried out.[220] He was\nlikewise hostile to permanent buildings and houses such as are erected\nin towns. Once, passing by the brick house of one of his governors, he\nobliged him to refund the money that had enabled him to enjoy such\nluxury; and when Sa\u02bfd b. Ab\u00ee Wa\u1e33\u1e33\u00e2\u1e63 asked his permission to build a\nhouse, the Chal\u00eef thought it was enough to possess a place that gave\nprotection from the sun\u2019s heat and the rain.[221] And this same Chal\u00eef,\nwho may pass for a still better type of the true Semite than Mo\u1e25ammed\nhimself, extends his preference for nomadism even to the mode of giving\nnames. The nomad calls himself by the name of the tribe to which he\nbelongs; the townsman, in whom all memory of tribal life is already\nextinct, receives a name from his birth-place, or that of his ancestors,\nor from his occupation. \u2018Learn your genealogies,\u2019 said \u02bfOmar, \u2018and be\nnot as the Nabateans of al-Saw\u00e2d; if you ask one of them where he comes\nfrom, he says he is from this or that town.\u2019 This trait of glorification\nof the old-fashioned Beduin-life, to the disparagement of the free\nurbanity of the townsmen, runs through a considerable section of Arabic\nliterature, which gladly encircled the rough manners of the sons of the\ndesert with a romantic nimbus of transfiguration. In this connexion a\npassage in a work falsely ascribed to W\u00e2\u1e33id\u00ee[222] should be noticed,\nwhich describes the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee Rif\u00e2\u02bfa b. Zuheir at the court of Byzantium,\nand after putting a satire against nomadism in the mouth of the emperor,\ngives a brilliant victory over this attack to the \u2018mouse-eating\u2019[223]\nBed\u00e2w\u00ee. This preference for nomadism, and the view that, although,\nhaving fewer wants, it be a simpler and more uniform stage of human\ndevelopment than city-life, it nevertheless surpasses the latter in\nnobility and purity, still live on in the system of the talented Arabian\nhistorian Ibn Chald\u00fbn. He devotes several sections of his historical\n\u2018Introduction\u2019 to the glorification of the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee against the\ntownsmen.[224] What was thus established theoretically is presented in\nreal life down to the present day. Still, as twelve centuries ago, the\nBed\u00e2w\u00ee alone are quite strictly entitled to the name al-\u02bfArab or\nal-\u02bfOrb\u00e2n (Arabs), and the Arabic poetry of the townsmen is found to\nhave its locality still in the desert. The old Arabic poet in forming\nhis poetical figures always likes best to carry the camel in his\nthoughts. With the camel the great majority of his best similes are\nconnected. In one verse the poet compares himself to a strong sumpter\ncamel; and in the very same line he, the camel, milks the breast of\nDeath, which again is regarded as a camel. Time is a camel sinking to\nearth, which crushes with its thick hide him on whom it falls; a thirsty\ncamel, which in its eagerness for water (here _men_) swallows\neverything.[225] War and calamity also are camels. The poet \u1e32ab\u00ee\u1e0fa b.\nJ\u00e2bir cries to his adversaries in praise of the valour of his own tribe:\n\u2018We are not _sons of young camels with breasts cut off_, but we are sons\nof fierce battle,\u2019 where, according to the interpretation of the native\ncommentator, the \u2018young camels with breasts cut off\u2019 are meant to denote\n\u2018_weak kings_, who provoke the ardour of battle in a very slight\ndegree.\u2019[226] How frequently, too, has the comparison of men with camels\nboth in a good and in a bad sense been employed! Even in the\nnomenclature of places and wells in the Arabian peninsula the camel\noften comes in, probably often as the result of comparisons of which the\ndetails have not been preserved.[227] The host of stars is to the nomad\na flock, which feeds by night on the heavenly pastures, and in the\nmorning is led back to the fold by the shepherd. A poet describing the\nlength of a night, exclaims: \u2018A night when the stars move slowly\nonwards, and which extends to such a length that I say to myself \u201cIt has\nno end, and _the shepherd of the stars_ will not come back\nto-day.\u201d\u2019[228] Hartwig Derenbourg finds the same view expressed also in\nPs. CXLVII. 4, \u2018Counting to the stars a number, calling them all [by]\nnames;\u2019[229] it is, however, doubtful whether this poetical passage is\nbased on the conception of the starry heaven as a flock.[230] But also\npoems of non-nomadic poets have been written from a Beduin point of\nview. The \u1e32as\u00eed\u00e2s of the Andalusian Arabic poets are written as from the\ncamel\u2019s back, and move in the scenery of the desert; and when a modern\nArab writes a \u1e32as\u00eed\u00e2 for an English lady, as has been done, the circle\nin which he moves is the circle of Imrul\u1e33ais and \u02bfAntar\u00e2.[231] This is\nnot the effect of the traditional canon of the \u1e32as\u00eed\u00e2 only, but of the\nArab\u2019s belief that true nobility is only to be found in the desert.\nTherefore his national enthusiasm transports him into the desert, for\nonly there is life noble and free, the life of towns being a\ndegradation. \u2018Even the town-life of the Arabs,\u2019 says the celebrated\nAfrican traveller George Schweinfurth,[232] \u2018is essentially half a camp\nlife. As a collateral illustration of this, I may remark that to this\nday Malta, where an Arab colony has reached as high a degree of\ncivilisation as ever yet it has attained, the small towns, which are\ninhabited by this active little community, are called by the very same\ndesignations as elsewhere belong to the nomad encampments in the\ndesert.\u2019 We must add, that even the so-called Moorish architecture is\nsaid by many art critics to point to nomadic life, and the onion-shaped\ndomes, the thin columns, the horse shoe-arches and the double pointed\narches to be transferred from the construction of the tent to stone. The\nwandering habits of the Arabs are also preserved to the present day.\n\u2018Even now,\u2019 says Gerhard Rohlfs,[233] \u2018this volatile people is engaged\nin constant wandering; the slightest reason is sufficient to make them\npack up their little tents and seek another abode.\u2019 Yet this experienced\ntraveller appears somewhat to overdo it when he adds: \u2018Their pleasure in\nroving has its root in the essence of the Mohammedan religion; wherever\nthe Arab can carry his Isl\u00e2m, he finds a home &c.\u2019 But Isl\u00e2m has, on the\ncontrary, rather contributed to give the Arab a stable, political,\nstate-building character. Certainly it has rather hindered than promoted\nthe development of the feeling of nationality\u2014it has this in common with\nevery religion of catholic nature; but it has not had the influence\nascribed to it by Rohlfs for the maintenance of the nomadic tendency.\nWhy, it is the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee himself who is the worst Mohammedan! With this\ntendency of the Arabian mind, finally, is connected the fact that the\nCentral Arabian sect of the Wahhabites, the very branch of the\nMohammedans which stands nearest to the old Patriarchal ways in faith\nand ideas of the world, and protests energetically against all novelties\nintroduced by foreign civilisation and historical advancement, has a\nparticular dislike to agriculture.[234]\n\nThe Hebrew conception of the world, like the Arabic, inclines to a\nglorification of the Nomadic life. In the last stage of their national\ndevelopment the Hebrews refer the origin of agriculture to a curse\nimposed by God on fallen humanity. What a charm tent-life had for\nthem, is proved by the fact that the fair shepherdess of the Song of\nSongs (I. 5) compares her beauty with ohol\u00ea \u1e32\u00ead\u00e2r, \u2018the tents of the\nArabs.\u2019 Even the Hellenised Jew Philo, quite in opposition to Greek\nideas, glorifies the shepherds as ideals of morality in contrast to\nthe agriculturists.[235] Such a view could not but exert an influence\non the figures of the myth. The persons of the myth who have our\nsympathy are generally presented as shepherds: Abel, Jacob, Moses, and\nDavid, are shepherds; whereas Cain is an agriculturist.\n\nMoreover, the idea that the fall of the human race is connected with\nagriculture is found, besides the analogous cases commonly adduced by\ncommentators, to be also often represented in the legends of the East\nAfrican negroes, especially in the Calabar legend of the Creation\ncommunicated by Bastian,[236] which presents many interesting points of\ncomparison with the Biblical story of the Fall. The first human pair is\ncalled by a bell at meal-times to Abasi (the Calabar God) in heaven; and\nin place of the forbidden tree of Genesis are put agriculture and\npropagation, which Abasi strictly denies to the first pair. The fall is\ndenoted by the transgression of both these commands, especially through\nthe use of implements of tillage, to which the woman is tempted by a\nfemale friend who is given to her. From that moment man fell and became\nmortal, so that, as the Bible story has it, he can \u2018eat bread only in\nthe sweat of his face.\u2019 There agriculture is a curse, a fall from a more\nperfect stage to a lower and imperfect one. This view of the\nagricultural life is, however, not the conception of nomads only; it is\nproper also to nations which have not even reached the stage of\nnomadism, but stand a step lower\u2014the hunters. To them their own\ncondition appears the happiest, and that of the agriculturist condemned\nby a curse. \u2018The countries inhabited by savages,\u2019 as Montesquieu makes\nhis Persian Usbek write,[237] \u2018are generally sparsely peopled, through\nthe distaste which almost all of them have for labour and the tillage of\nthe soil. This unfortunate aversion is so strong that when they make an\nimprecation against one of their enemies, they wish him nothing worse\nthan that he may be reduced to field-labour,[238] deeming no exercise\nnoble and worthy of them except hunting and fishing.\u2019 This contempt of a\nsedentary life and its usage is by the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee directed also especially\nagainst the practice of arts and manufactures. Hence it comes that such\npeoples as the Arabs, which even in a sedentary condition regard nomadic\nlife as a nobler stage of manners than the agricultural life to which\nthey have _fallen_, neglect manufactures and seldom attain to any\nperfection in them. This is especially true of the inhabitants of the\nholy cities of the Arabian peninsula, who give a practical proof of\ntheir preference for Beduinism by the fact that the Sher\u00eef-families let\ntheir sons pass their childhood in the tents of the desert for the sake\nof a nobler education. \u2018I am inclined to think,\u2019 says the credible\ntraveller Burckhardt in his description of the inhabitants of\nMedina,[239] \u2018that the want of artisans here is to be attributed to the\nvery low estimation in which they are held by the Arabians, whose pride\noften proves stronger than their cupidity, and prevents a father from\neducating his sons in any craft. This aversion they probably inherit\nfrom the ancient inhabitants, the Bedouins, who, as I have remarked,\nexclude to this day all handicraftsmen from their tribes, and consider\nthose who settle in their encampment as of an inferior caste, with whom\nthey neither associate nor intermarry.\u2019[240] Burton compares the Arabs\nof the desert in this respect with the North American Indians of a\nformer generation: \u2018Both recognising no other occupation but war and the\nchase, despise artificers and the effeminate people of cities, as the\ngame-cock spurns the vulgar roosters of the poultry-yard.\u2019[241] The same\nis true of the relation of the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee towards the townsmen in the Somali\ncountry.[242] Kant, who casually notices this remarkable trait of human\nideas in a small tract, refers the peculiarity to the fact that not only\nthe natural laziness, but also the vanity (a misunderstood freedom) of\nman cause those who have merely to live\u2014whether profusely or\nparsimoniously\u2014to consider themselves Magnates in comparison with those\nwho have to labour in order to live.[243]\n\nThus is explained the conception which forms the basis of the Story of\nthe Fall, and at the same time everything else in the older strata of\nHebrew mythology in which the sympathy of the myth-forming people is\ngiven to the shepherds, to the prejudice of personages introduced as\nagriculturists. And now we will consider the most prominent of the\nfigures forming the elements of the ancient Hebrew mythology.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 120:\n\n See Sir Ch. Lyell, _The Geological Evidence of the Antiquity of Man_\n (4th ed. 1873), pp. 122 _et seq._ and 228. See also F. Lenormant\u2019s\n essay, \u2018L\u2019Homme Fossile,\u2019 in his _Les premi\u00e9res Civilisations_, I. 42.\n\nFootnote 121:\n\n _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, I. 407. Compare Hehn, _Culturpflanzen\n und Hausthiere_, 2nd edit., p. 103.\n\nFootnote 122:\n\n Bergmann, _Les peuples primitifs de la race de Jaf\u00e8te_, Colmar 1853,\n pp. 42, 45, 52, 53 apud Renan, _Hist. g\u00e9n. d. langues s\u00e9m._, p. 39. It\n is interesting that the ancients explained the hard-bested name of the\n Pelasgians from this point of view, making \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b3\u03bf\u03af equivalent to\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03af = storks (Strabo, V. 313; Falconer, ed. Kramer, V. 2, \u00a7 4).\n Compare Pott, _Etymologische Forschungen_, 1836, II. 527.\n\nFootnote 123:\n\n Blau in the _Zeitschrift d. D. M. G._, 1858, II. 589.\n\nFootnote 124:\n\n Waitz, _ibid._ II. 349.\n\nFootnote 125:\n\n Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 410. a.\n\nFootnote 126:\n\n Munk, _Pal\u00e4stina_, Germ. transl. by Levy, Leipzig 1871, p. 190.\n\nFootnote 127:\n\n Ebers, _Aegypten und die B\u00fccher Moses_, I. 70.\n\nFootnote 128:\n\n See the passage in Schrader, _Keilinschriften und das A. T._, p. 64.\n 20.\n\nFootnote 129:\n\n See B\u00f6ttcher, _Ausf\u00fchrl. Lehrb. d. hebr\u00e4ischen Sprache_, edited by\n M\u00fchlau, p. 7, _note_.\n\nFootnote 130:\n\n _Einleitung in das Studium der arab. Sprache_, p. 19.\n\nFootnote 131:\n\n Compare the Hottentot national name _Saan_, from _s\u00e2_ \u2018to rest,\u2019 i.e.\n \u2018the Settlers\u2019 (F. M\u00fcller, _Allgemeine Ethnographie_, p. 75).\n\nFootnote 132:\n\n J.S. M\u00fcller, _Semiten, Chamiten und Japheiten_, &c, p. 257.\n\nFootnote 133:\n\n Lenormant, _\u00c9tudes Accadiennes_, pt. 3, I. 72.\n\nFootnote 134:\n\n _Al-Nawaw\u00ee_ (the Cairo edition of Muslim\u2019s collection, with\n Commentary), V. 169.\n\nFootnote 135:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XVI. 82 _penult._\n\nFootnote 136:\n\n Burton\u2019s _First Footsteps in East Africa_, London 1856, p. 174.\n\nFootnote 137:\n\n See _al-N\u00e2bi\u0121\u00e2_, XXXI. v. 4 (Derenbourg).\n\nFootnote 138:\n\n On the Calendar of the Arabs before Mo\u1e25ammed (in _Zeitschrift der D.\n M. G._, 1859, XIII. 161).\n\nFootnote 139:\n\n _Sprachliches aus den Zeltlagern der syrischen W\u00fcste_, p. 32, _note_\n 21 (a reprint from _Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, 1868, XXII.).\n\nFootnote 140:\n\n A species of lyric poem or elegy.\u2014Tr.\n\nFootnote 141:\n\n _Sa\u1e33t al-zand_ (B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 edition of 1286), II. 34. Yet _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, I. 147.\n 20, in a poem of Nu\u1e63eyb: wa lam ara matb\u00fb\u02bfan a\u1e0darra min-al-ma\u1e6dari.\n\nFootnote 142:\n\n See an example in _Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, 1857, V. p. 100, l. 14.\n\nFootnote 143:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XI. 126.\n\nFootnote 144:\n\n \u1e62a\u1e25\u00e2\u1e25, s.r. _\u1e6dr\u1e33_.\n\nFootnote 145:\n\n Chunnas, \u2018planet,\u2019 i.e. Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, or Mercury.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 146:\n\n _Commentary on the \u1e32or\u00e2n_ (Fleischer\u2019s edition), II. 397. 6.\n\nFootnote 147:\n\n _Phaleg_ (ed. Frankfort), II. 124.\n\nFootnote 148:\n\n Yerach (pausal y\u00e2rach), Gen. X. 26, 1 Chr. I. 20; elsewhere yerach\n denotes \u2018month\u2019 and y\u00e2r\u00eaach \u2018moon.\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 149:\n\n Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-ishti\u1e33\u00e2\u1e33_, p. 99. 9.\n\nFootnote 150:\n\n _Culturgeschichtliche Streifz\u00fcge auf dem Gebiete des Islams_, Leipzig\n 1873, p. viii.\n\nFootnote 151:\n\n See Creuzer, _Symbolik und Mythologie der alten V\u00f6lker_, 3rd ed., I.\n 38.\n\nFootnote 152:\n\n Welcker, _Griechische G\u00f6tterlehre_, I. 169.\n\nFootnote 153:\n\n As the myth grows more and more into a religion, and the conception of\n a mighty god who excels all others becomes fixed, the production of\n thunder and rain, &c., is gradually transferred to this originally\n solar god (see also Max M\u00fcller, _Chips_, &c., I. 357 _et seq._). The\n sharp division made above is therefore absolutely true only of the\n purely mythological stage. Conversely Indra and Varu\u1e47a, originally\n figures belonging to the gloomy cloudy and rainy sky, which take the\n highest places in the Indian religion, are in the Vedic Hymns endowed\n with solar traits.\n\nFootnote 154:\n\n Those to whom the philosophical terms _objective_ and _subjective_ are\n not familiar must understand them respectively as _impersonal_ or\n _impartial_, and _personal_ or _partial_; the former being that which\n is outside the thinker\u2019s personality, the latter that which is within\n him, and therefore often the reflected image of external things on his\n own mind.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 155:\n\n On the disappearance of individuality in direct proportion to\n antiquity, see Wilhelm von Humboldt, _Ueber die Verschiedenheit des\n menschlichen Sprachbaues_, Berlin 1836, p. 4. Lazarus appears to\n concede to the individual too much influence on the origin of speech;\n see _Leben der Seele_ II. 115.\n\nFootnote 156:\n\n See the article \u2018Das Epos\u2019 in _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, &c.\n 1868, V. 8, 10.\n\nFootnote 157:\n\n N\u00f6ldeke, _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Kenntniss der Poesie der alten Araber_, p. 185.\n 12.\n\nFootnote 158:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, VI. 137. 17.\n\nFootnote 159:\n\n _Durrat al-\u0121auw\u00e2s_ (ed. Thorbecke), p. 178. 4.\n\nFootnote 160:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, I. 934. 2.\n\nFootnote 161:\n\n _Romance of \u02bfAntar_, IV. 97. 2.\n\nFootnote 162:\n\n This connexion is found among the Polynesians: \u2018The time-reckoning in\n all Polynesia conformed to the moon. They reckoned by nights,\u2019 &c.,\n Gerland, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_. 71. Only the nights had\n names, the days had none, _ibid._, pp. 72. Both the chronology\n according to moons and the counting of days by nights are\n linguistically demonstrated of the Melanesian group. See the\n comparison in Gerland, _ibid._, pp. 616\u2013619.\n\nFootnote 163:\n\n Laz. Geiger, _Ursprung und Entwicklung der menschlichen Sprache und\n Vernunft_, II. 270.\n\nFootnote 164:\n\n _Die heiligen Schriften der Parsen_, in German, II. xcviii. and III.\n xx.\n\nFootnote 165:\n\n _God in History_, II. 433\u20135.\n\nFootnote 166:\n\n _De Bello Gallico_, VI. 18: \u2018Spatia omnis temporis non numero dierum,\n sed noctium finiunt; dies natales et mensium et annorum initia sic\n observant, ut _noctem dies subsequatur_.\u2019\n\nFootnote 167:\n\n _Germania_, XI: \u2018Nec dierum numerum, ut nos, sed noctium computant.\n Sic constituunt, sic condicunt: _nox ducere diem videtur_,\u2019 in\n connexion with the public assemblies at the changes of the moon. The\n fact must not be overlooked that, according to Caesar, _ibid._ 22, the\n Germans \u2018agriculturae non student, majorque pars victus eorum in\n lacte, caseo, carne consistit.\u2019 See also, on this subject, Pictet,\n _Les origines Indo-Europ\u00e9ennes et les Aryas primitifs_, II. 588.\n\nFootnote 168:\n\n And in \u2018Se'nnight.\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 169:\n\n The identical English term \u2018Leap year\u2019 is another apposite\n example.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 170:\n\n See the Hungarian review, _Magyar Nyelv\u0151r_, I. 26\u201328.\n\nFootnote 171:\n\n In Rawlinson\u2019s _History of Herodotus_, App. to Book II. chap. VII. \u00a7\n 16\u201320 (ed. of 1862, vol. II. p. 282 _et seq._).\n\nFootnote 172:\n\n Waitz, _l. c._ IV. 174.\n\nFootnote 173:\n\n See Karl Andree, _Forschungsreisen_, &c., II. 205.\n\nFootnote 174:\n\n Mommsen, _History of Rome_, I. 217 (ed. 1862), 230 (ed. 1868).\n\nFootnote 175:\n\n Welcker, _Griechische G\u00f6tterlehre_, I. 555.\n\nFootnote 176:\n\n Sir Gardner Wilkinson, in Rawlinson\u2019s _Herodotus_, ed. 1862, vol. II.\n p. 283, \u00a7 17.\n\nFootnote 177:\n\n _Die quin\u00e4re und vigesimale Z\u00e4hlmethode_, Halle 1867.\n\nFootnote 178:\n\n Waitz, _l. c_. II. p. 224, compared with Bastian, _Geographische und\n ethnologische Bilder_, Jena 1874, pp. 144, 155.\n\nFootnote 179:\n\n See on this J. Muir, _Contributions to a Knowledge of the Vedic\n Theogon and Mythology_ (_Journal of Royal Asiatic Society_, N.S.,\n 1864, I. pp. 54\u201358).\n\nFootnote 180:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Lectures on the Science of Language_, Second Series, p.\n 430.\n\nFootnote 181:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Chips_, &c., II. p. 65. Muir, _l. c._ p. 77 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 182:\n\n This is connected with M\u00fcller\u2019s view that \u2018language must die before it\n can enter into a new stage of mythological life\u2019 (_Lectures on the\n Science of Language_, Second Series, p. 426).\n\nFootnote 183:\n\n _Lectures_, &c., Second Series, p. 432.\n\nFootnote 184:\n\n Rawlinson, _History of Herodotus_, I. 211.\n\nFootnote 185:\n\n V. 3: \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f04\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bc\u03ae\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03ae \u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76\n \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 186:\n\n The literature is clearly and concisely enumerated in G. Rawlinson\u2019s\n essay _On the Early History of the Athenians_, \u00a78-11 (_Hist. of\n Herod._, Bk. II. Essay II.). But it must be added that the idea of the\n learned author\u2014\u2018The Attic castes, if they existed, belong to the very\n infancy of the nation, and had certainly passed into tribes long\n before the reign of Codrus\u2019\u2014does not agree with the historical\n sequence demanded by the connexion of the tribes with nomadic life and\n that of the caste with fixed tenure. In the very nature of the case\n the division into tribes is proper to nomadism, which knows of no\n systematic occupation with arts and trades, whereas the division into\n castes presupposes such an occupation with trades and arts as only a\n sedentary life renders possible. Therefore, between tribes and castes\n the priority will always have to be assigned to the former.\n\nFootnote 187:\n\n Spiegel, _Ueber die eranische Stammesverfassung_ (_Abhandlungen der\n k\u00f6n. bair. Akad. d. W._, 1855, Bd. VII.); _Kasten und St\u00e4nde in der\n arischen Vorzeit_ (_Ausland_, 1874, No. 36).\n\nFootnote 188:\n\n _Die heiligen Schriften der Parsen_, in German, III. vi.\n\nFootnote 189:\n\n _Ibid._ II. xiv.-xv.\n\nFootnote 190:\n\n _Zeitschrift d. D. M. G._ 1852, VI. 67 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 191:\n\n _God in History_, II. 8.\n\nFootnote 192:\n\n _Narrative of a Year\u2019s Journey through Central and Eastern Arabia_, I.\n 8.\n\nFootnote 193:\n\n See Welcker. _Griechische G\u00f6tterlehre_, I. 551.\n\nFootnote 194:\n\n _Zur hauranischen Alterthumskunde_ (_Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, 1861,\n XV. 444).\n\nFootnote 195:\n\n It should be noted that from Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-ishti\u1e33\u00e2\u1e33_, p. 96.\n II, it is evidently possible that in such compounds the word \u02bfabd\n itself may belong to the idol; he writes wa-\u02bfabdu shams^{in} za\u02bfam\u00fb\n \u1e63anam^{un} wa-\u1e33\u00e2la \u1e33aum^{un} bal \u02bfaynu m\u00e2^{in} ma\u02bfrufat^{un} wa-hua\n ism^{un} \u1e33ad\u00eem^{un}: \u2018\u02bfAbd Shams is in the opinion of some an idol,\n others say it is the name of a well-known spring of water: it is an\n old name.\u2019\n\nFootnote 196:\n\n Tuch, _Sinaitische Inschriften_ (_Zeitschr. der D. M. G._, 1849, III.\n 202).\u2014Osiander, _Vorislam. Religion der Araber_ (_Zeitschr. der D. M.\n G._, 1853. VII. 483).\n\nFootnote 197:\n\n _T\u00e2j-al-\u02bfar\u00fbs_, II. 209.\n\nFootnote 198:\n\n Schlottmann, _Die Inschrift Eshmunazar\u2019s_, Halle 1868, p. 84.\n\nFootnote 199:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, IV. 85. See al-Jaw\u00e2l\u00ee\u1e33\u00ee\u2019s _Livre des locutions vicieuses_ (ed.\n Derenbourg in _Morgenl\u00e4nd. Forschungen_), p. 153.\n\nFootnote 200:\n\n _Zur vergleichenden Religionsgeschichte_, 1 Art. (_Ausland_ 1872), p.\n 4. See also 1871, p. 1159.\n\nFootnote 201:\n\n Compare also the Himyaric proper name Ben S\u00een (Hal\u00e9vy, _\u00c9tudes\n sab\u00e9ennes_ [_Journal Asiat._ 1874, II. 543]).\n\nFootnote 202:\n\n Lenormant, _Les premi\u00e8res civilisations_, II. 158.\n\nFootnote 203:\n\n Schrader, _Die H\u00f6llenfahrt der Istar_, p. 45.\n\nFootnote 204:\n\n _Egypt\u2019s Place in Universal History_, IV. 342.\n\nFootnote 205:\n\n In his essay on the Egyptian antiquities at the Great Exhibition of\n 1867 at Paris.\n\nFootnote 206:\n\n I must explain that the preceding four sections were already written\n down, before I could get a sight of Kuhn\u2019s essay, which appeared\n later.\n\nFootnote 207:\n\n _Ueber Entwickelungsstufen der Mythenbildung_, Berlin 1874; from the\n _Abhandlungen der k\u00f6nigl. Akademie d. Wiss. zu Berlin (phil.-hist.\n Klasse)_, 1873, pp. 123\u2013137.\n\nFootnote 208:\n\n _Rude Stone Monuments in all Countries, their Ages and Uses_, London\n 1872, pp. 9 _et seq._ and 28.\n\nFootnote 209:\n\n The same is stated of some American tribes by Sir J. Lubbock, _The\n Origin of Civilisation_, ed. 3, 1875, pp. 273, 306, _et seq._\n\nFootnote 210:\n\n Georg Schweinfurth, _The Heart of Africa_, I. p. 200.\n\nFootnote 211:\n\n But we cannot on this account characterise the Semites generally by\n the assertions, \u2018The Semites are in general a pastoral people,\u2019 \u2018the\n Semites live in tents,\u2019 as Friedrich von Hellwald does in his\n _Culturgeschichte in ihrer nat\u00fcrlichen Entwickelung_, p. 134. A glance\n at the sedentary Phenicians and the settled Semites of Mesopotamia\n shows at once the important exceptions. It must also not be overlooked\n that agriculture was in practice to no small extent among the\n Phenicians; even the Romans call a kind of threshing machine, the\n \u2018Punic:\u2019 Varro, _De re rustica_, I. 52; cf. Lowth, _De sacra poesi\n Hebraeorum_, Oxford 1821, Prael. VII. p. 62. The commerce with Egypt,\n which von Hellwald brings into prominence, is no sufficient reason why\n the favourite characterisation of the Semites does not apply to these\n nations. The Hebrews continued their nomadic life for a long time\n after they had made intimate acquaintance with Egypt; and the nomadic\n Arabs were not materially influenced by communication with sedentary\n nations.\n\nFootnote 212:\n\n Given by Josephus Langius, _Florilegii magni seu Polyantheae ... libri\n XXIII._, Lugduni 1681, I. 120, as by Aristophanes; but the author and\n the translator have searched the works and fragments of Aristophanes\n in vain.\n\nFootnote 213:\n\n Ovid also begins with the life of the fields; his golden age is\n distinguished from the others only in this, that:\n\n Ipsa quoque immunis, rastroque intacta, nec ullis\n Saucia vomeribus, per se dabat omnia tellus;\n\n and\n\n Mox etiam fruges tellus inarata ferebat:\n Nec renovatus ager gravidis canebat aristis.\n (_Metamorph._ I. 101\u20132, 109\u201310.)\n\nFootnote 214:\n\n _History of Herodotus_, tr. G. Rawlinson, IV. c. 46, note 5.\n\nFootnote 215:\n\n Muslim\u2019s _Collection of Traditions_ (ed. of Cairo with commentary), I.\n 138; al-Jauhar\u00ee, s.r. _fdd._ Cf. Dozy, _Geschichte der Mauren in\n Spanien_, Leipzig 1874, I. 17.\n\nFootnote 216:\n\n Al-Buch\u00e2r\u00ee, _Recueil des Traditions Musulmans_ (ed. Krehl), II. 385\n (LX. No. 29).\n\nFootnote 217:\n\n Al-Buch\u00e2r\u00ee, _Recueil_ &c., II. 74 (XL I. No. 20).\n\nFootnote 218:\n\n Al-Buch\u00e2r\u00ee, _Recueil_ &c. p. 67, No. 2. It is true these expressions\n might be balanced by a few somewhat opposite in character, such as\n that which declares that in the judgment of the Prophet the best\n business is Trade; according to other reporters Manufacture; according\n to others (whose version is regarded as the correct one) Agriculture\n (see al-Nawaw\u00ee on Muslim\u2019s _Collection of Traditions_, IV. 32). Still\n such sentences, even when confirmed by others, cannot weaken the force\n of those cited in the text. I must also mention in conclusion that al\n Sha\u02bfr\u00e2n\u00ee in his _Book of the Balance_ (Kit\u00e2b al-m\u00eez\u00e2n, Cairo\n [Castelli], 1279, II. 68) mentions this question as a point of\n difference among the canonical authorities of Islamic theology: the\n school of al-Sh\u00e2fe\u02bf\u00ee regards trade as the noblest occupation, whilst\n the three other Im\u00e2ms (Ab\u00fb \u1e24an\u00eef\u00e2, M\u00e2lik b. Anas, and A\u1e25med b. \u1e24anbal)\n declare for field-labour and manufactures.\n\nFootnote 219:\n\n See Alfred von Kremer, _Culturgeschichte des Orients unter den\n Khalifen_, I. 16.\n\nFootnote 220:\n\n Von Kremer, _ibid._ pp. 71, 77; _Culturgeschichtlichte Streifz\u00fcge_, p.\n xi.\n\nFootnote 221:\n\n Ibn \u02bfAbdi Rabbihi, _Kit\u00e2b al-\u02bfi\u1e33d al-fer\u00eed_, ed. B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 1293 A.H., vol.\n III. p. 347.\n\nFootnote 222:\n\n _Futuh as-Sh\u00e2m_, being an account of the Moslem conquests in Syria,\n ed. Nassau Lees, Calcutta 1854, I. 9 _et seq_.\n\nFootnote 223:\n\n This satirical reproach of the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee often occurs, e.g. sometimes in\n the Romance of \u02bf_Antar_ in passages which are not accessible to me at\n the present moment. We meet with it also in the Persian king\n Yezdegird\u2019s satire on the Arabs (_Chroniques de Tabari_, transl. by\n Zotenberg, III. 387). Later also, in Ibn Ba\u1e6d\u00fb\u1e6d\u00e2, _Voyages_, III. 282,\n where the Indian Prince describes his Beduin brother-in-law Seif\n al-D\u00een \u0120ada, who had at first charmed him, but afterwards been\n disgraced for his want of manners, by the epithet _m\u00fbsh ch\u00e2r_, i.e.\n \u2018field-rat-eater;\u2019 \u2018for,\u2019 adds the traveller, \u2018the Arabs of the Desert\n eat field-rats.\u2019 See also _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, III. 33, l. 4 from below, where\n Bashsh\u00e2r b. Burd accuses a Bed\u00e2w\u00ee of hunting mice (\u1e63eydu fa\u02bfrin).\n\nFootnote 224:\n\n _Prol\u00e9gom\u00e8nes, trad. par de Slane_, pp. 255\u2013273.\n\nFootnote 225:\n\n A collection of similar poetical passages is to be found in Freytag\u2019s\n _Commentary on the am\u00e2s\u00e2_, pp. 601 and 606.\n\nFootnote 226:\n\n _\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, Text, p. 340, 3 _infr._\n\nFootnote 227:\n\n E.g. Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fb\u1e6d, _Geograph. Dict._, II. 118. s.v. _gamal_.\n\nFootnote 228:\n\n _al-N\u00e2bi\u0121\u00e2_, III. 2.\n\nFootnote 229:\n\n _Journal Asiatique_, 1868, II. 378.\n\nFootnote 230:\n\n Just as can be said of another passage closely connected with the\n above, Is. XL. 26. On the contrary, especially in the latter passage,\n the host of stars is compared to a war-host, \u1e63\u00e2bh\u00e2; and the idea that\n each star is a valiant warrior is also not strange to Arabic poetry\n (e.g. _\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, p. 36, l. 5, comp. Num. XXIV. 17); for the conception\n of \u1e63eb\u00e2 hash-shamay\u00eem \u2018host or army of heaven,\u2019 has taken as firm root\n among the Arabs as among the Hebrews. \u2018For thou art the Sun,\u2019 says\n al-N\u00e2bi\u0121\u00e2 (VIII. 10) to king No\u02bfm\u00e2n, \u2018and the other kings are stars;\n when the former rises, not a single star of these latter are any\n longer visible.\u2019 With this is connected the expression juy\u00fbsh al-\u1e93al\u00e2m\n \u2018the armies of darkness\u2019 (_Romance of \u02bfAntar_, XVIII. 8. 6, XXV. 60.\n 69). In the last passage, indeed, it stands in parallelism with\n \u02bfas\u00e2kir al-\u1e0di\u02be\u00e2 w-al-ibtis\u00e2m \u2018armies of light and smiling,\u2019 just as\n with the synonymous juy\u00fbsh al-\u0121eyhab (_\u02bfAntar_, XV. 58. 11).\n\nFootnote 231:\n\n On this peculiarity of the poets of the towns an opinion of \u02bfAjj\u00e2j\n very much to the point occurs in the _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, II. 18.\n\nFootnote 232:\n\n _The Heart of Africa_, I. 28.\n\nFootnote 233:\n\n _Quer durch Afrika_, I. 121.\n\nFootnote 234:\n\n Palgrave, _Central and Eastern Arabia_, I. 463.\n\nFootnote 235:\n\n _De Sacrificio Kajin_, p. 169, ed. Mangey, Oxford 1742. In another\n treatise Philo distinguishes two kinds of shepherds and two kinds of\n agriculturists, of which one kind is blameworthy, and the other\n praiseworthy. There is a distinction between \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd and \u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03c2,\n and on the other hand between \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 (probably answering to the\n Hebrew \u02bf\u00f4b\u00ead ad\u00e2m\u00e2), and \u03b3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c2 (probably intended to represent the\n Hebrew \u00eesh ad\u00e2m\u00e2). See _De Agricultura_, p. 303 _et seq_.\n\nFootnote 236:\n\n _Geographische und ethnologische Bilder_, pp. 191\u201397.\n\nFootnote 237:\n\n _Lettres persanes_, Lettre CXXI.\n\nFootnote 238:\n\n See Herberstein, _Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii_, Vienna 1549, p.\n 61, where a Tatar formula of execration is said to be \u2018ut eodem in\n loco perpetuo tamquam Christianus haereas.\u2019\n\nFootnote 239:\n\n _Travels in Arabia_, ed. Ouseley, 1829, p. 381.\n\nFootnote 240:\n\n A notable illustration of this relation is presented by the Arabic\n proverb, \u2018If you hear that the smith (of the caravan) is packing up in\n the evening, be sure that he will not go till the following morning\u2019\n (_al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee_, B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 edition, I. 34). Notice the occasion of the\n origin of this proverb, in the commentary on the passage.\n\nFootnote 241:\n\n _Personal Narrative of Pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina_, 2nd ed. 1857,\n I. 117.\n\nFootnote 242:\n\n Burton\u2019s _First Footsteps in Eastern Africa_, p. 240.\n\nFootnote 243:\n\n Kant\u2019s _Kleinere Schriften zur Logik und Metaphysik, herausgegeben von\n Kirchmann_, II. 4 (_Philosoph. Bibliothek_, Hermann, Bd. XXXIII.).\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER V.\n _THE MOST PROMINENT FIGURES IN HEBREW MYTHOLOGY._\n\n\nBattle and bloodshed, pursuit and suppression on the one side, love and\nunion, glowing desire and coy evasion on the other, are the points of\nview from which the Myth regards the relations of day and night, of the\ngrey morning and the sunrise, of the red sunset and the darkness of\nnight, and their recurring changes. And this point of view is made yet\nmore definite by the mythical idea that when forces are either engaged\nin mutual conflict, or seeking and pursuing one another in mutual love,\nas one follows the other, so one must have sprung from the other, as the\nchild from the father or the mother; or else, being conceived as\nexisting side by side in the moment of battle or of heavenly love, must\nbe brothers or sisters, children of the same father or of the same\nmother, i.e. of the phenomenon that precedes both of them alike\u2014as the\nbright day precedes the twilight and the night\u2014or must be the parents of\nthe child that follows them.\n\nTherefore, still more definitely, murders of parents or children or\nbrothers, battles between brothers, sexual love and union between\nchildren and parents, between brother and sister, form the chief plots\nof all myths, and by their manifold shades have produced that variety in\nour race\u2019s earliest observations of nature, which we encounter in the\nthousand colours of the Myth.\n\nThe talented founders of Aryan Comparative Mythology, especially Max\nM\u00fcller in the first rank, have set these themes of the myth on so firm\nand unquestioned a foundation both in relation to psychology and to\nphilology, and have so completely introduced them to the mind of the\neducated class, that I may safely omit a new exposition of this axiom of\nall Mythology. I content myself with pointing once more to what was\nshown in the preceding chapters, that these fundamental mythical themes\nare not something specially Aryan, but lie at the bottom of the Myth of\nall mankind without distinction of race, and consequently must form a\nstarting-point when we are about to investigate Semitic or Hebrew myths.\n\nThe task of the following chapter will therefore be to find a place in\nthe category of what is _common_ to the _whole_ of human kind for the\nmyth of the Hebrews; in other words, to prove the existence of the\nmyth-plots on Hebrew ground. As it is not my object to exhaust all the\nmaterials, to present a system already perfectly worked out on every\nside, or to erect a building with all its rooms and stories stuffed\nfull, I shall confine myself to that which, after competent and sober\nphilological criticism, can be acknowledged as certain and indubitable.\nI hope that other investigators, who will gain from the method pursued\nhere a rich treasury of material, will then follow up these safe results\nby gleanings of their own.\n\n\n\u00a7 1. In the designation of the Heaven the Semite starts from the\nsensuous impression of _height_, and therefore forms the names denoting\nit from the roots _sam\u00e2_ (shama) and _r\u00e2m_, both of which express the\nidea of \u2018being high.\u2019 To the latter group belongs e.g. the Ethiopic\nrayam,[244] which denotes _heaven_. Both roots are combined in the\nPhenician Sh\u00e2m\u00een-r\u00fbm. One of the most prominent figures of Hebrew\nmythology belongs to this category: Abh-r\u00e2m the _High Father_, with his\ninnumerable host of descendants.[245] We have seen above that in his\nview of nature the nomad begins with the sky at night. The sky by itself\nis the dark, nightly, or clouded heaven; the sunshine on the sky is an\naccessory. Hence it comes that in Arabic the word Sky (sam\u00e2) is very\noften used even for \u2018Rain;\u2019 and the notions of _rain_ and _sky_ are so\nclosely interwoven that even the traces of rain on the earth are called\nsky.[246] In the language of the Bongo people there is only one word for\nsky and rain, het\u014drro.[247] On Semitic ground the Assyrian divine name\nRammanu or Raman must be mentioned here. If this name has any\netymological connexion with the root _r\u00e2m_ \u2018to be high,\u2019 as Hesychius\nand some modern scholars say, though others derive it from _ra\u02bfam_\n\u2018thunder,\u2019 Ra\u02bfam\u00e2n \u2018the Thunderer,\u2019[248] then we find here again the\nprimitive mythological idea that the intrinsically High is the dark\nstormy sky, or, personified, the God of Storms. So also in the old\nHebrew myth the \u2018High\u2019 is the nightly or rainy sky. The best known myth\nthat the Hebrews told of their Abh-r\u00e2m is the story of the intended\nsacrifice of his only son Yi\u1e63ch\u00e2\u1e33, commonly called Isaac. But what is\nYi\u1e63ch\u00e2\u1e33? Literally translated, the word denotes \u2018he laughs,\u2019 or \u2018the\nLaughing.\u2019 In the Semitic languages, especially in proper names and\nepithets, the use of the aorist[249] (even in the second person, e.g. in\nthe Arabic name Taz\u00eed) is very frequent where we should employ a\nparticiple.[250] So here. Now who is the \u2018He laughs,\u2019 the \u2018Smiling one'?\nNo other but 'He who sits in heaven and laughs\u2019 (Ps. II. 4), whom the\nmythology of almost all nations and their later poetry too likes to call\nthe Laughing or Smiling one. When, as Plutarch tells in his Life of\nLycurgus, that legislator consecrated a statue to Laughter (\u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2) and\nLaughter enjoyed divine honours at Sparta, we are certainly not to\nunderstand it of the laughter that plays round the lips of mortals, but\nof the celestial smile with which Mythology endows the Sun, as when the\nIndian singer calls Ushas (the Sun[251]) the _Smiling_ (Rigveda, VI. 64.\n10). With regard to the Sun\u2019s laughing in the Aryan mythology, we can\nrefer to the learned work of Angelo de Gubernatis, \u2018Zoological\nMythology\u2019 (vol. I. i. 1).\n\nBut there is a primitive connexion between the ideas \u2018to laugh\u2019 and \u2018to\nshine,\u2019 which is not, as might be thought, brought about _figuratively_\nby a mere poetical view, but rather, at least on the Semitic field,\nestablished at the very beginning of the formation of speech. An\nextraordinary number of the verbs which describe a loud expression of\njoyousness (to shout, bellow, laugh &c.), originally denoted to shine,\ndazzle, be visible, and the like; affording another confirmation of\nGeiger\u2019s thesis, that language owes its origin more to optic than to\nacoustic impressions (see _supra_ p. 40). I give a series of linguistic\nfacts as examples to prove this assertion. The Hebrew \u1e63\u00e2hal signifies\nboth \u2018to shine bright\u2019 and \u2018to cry aloud,\u2019 and its phonetic connexion\nwith \u1e63\u00e2har, z\u00e2har &c., proves the priority of the optical meaning.\nSimilarly hill\u00eal, which means \u2018to cry out, to triumph,\u2019 was originally\n\u2018to be brilliant,\u2019 as is proved by the derivative nouns hil\u00e2l (Ar.) \u2018new\nmoon\u2019 and h\u00eal\u00eal (Heb.) \u2018morning star,\u2019 and the employment of the verb\nitself in Hebrew. \u1e62\u00e2rach, \u1e63erach, \u1e63ara\u1e25a, denotes \u2018to cry\u2019 in the chief\nrepresentatives of Semitism; but the Arabic has also preserved the\noriginal sense \u2018clarus, manifestus fuit,\u2019 which appears in the Hebrew\nnoun \u1e63er\u00eeach \u2018a conspicuous eminence,\u2019 or \u2018a high tower.\u2019[252] The roots\ny\u00e2pha\u02bf (in Hiph\u02bf\u00eel) \u2018to be bright\u2019 and p\u00e2\u02bf\u00e2 \u2018to cry,\u2019 are through their\netymological connexion brought into this group. The root of the Hebrew\nh\u00ead\u00e2d \u2018cry of joy\u2019 is the same from which Hadad, the name of the Syrian\ngod of the shining sun, can be etymologically derived. This root\nundoubtedly represents a reduplicated form of the radical of the solar\nname Yeh\u00fbd\u00e2 \u2018Judah\u2019 (see \u00a7 14 of this chapter). The verbal root from\nwhich nah\u00e2r (Ar.) neh\u00e2r\u00e2 (Heb.) \u2018daylight,\u2019 is derived has in one Arabic\nderivative form the meaning \u2018to cry.\u2019 So also \u1e63\u00e2cha\u1e33 \u2018to laugh aloud\u2019\n(compare \u1e63\u00e2\u02bfa\u1e33 \u2018to cry\u2019) must have originally expressed the idea of\n\u2018being bright, clear,\u2019 which is proper to the primitive Semitic root\n\u1e63a\u1e25, \u1e63ach. If this be admitted, it follows that the name Yi\u1e63cha\u1e33 as a\nsolar epithet was not formed by mere figurative or poetical metaphor,\nbut is based on the original signification of the group of roots to\nwhich it belongs. Poetical phraseology then brought into general use\nwhat was based on etymology.\n\nThere is nothing more universal and more generally pervading all\nnature-poetry than the idea \u2018Like one _laughing gaily_ the world shone,\u2019\nas the Tatar poet says of the sunrise;[253] and in Arabic poetry, which\nhas to be especially considered on these subjects, it is met with at\nevery step. In the charming Romance of \u02bfAntar, the cessation of night\nand the break of day is dozens of times expressed by the words \u2018until\nthe black night went off and the _laughing morning_ (al-\u1e63ab\u00e2\u1e25 al-\u1e0da\u1e25ik)\narose;\u2019 or \u2018the morning arose and smiled (ibtasama) out of dazzling\nteeth.\u2019[254] The old poet al-A\u02bfsha says of a blooming meadow that it\nrivals the sun in laughter (yu\u1e0d\u00e2\u1e25ik al-shams);[255] and in the last\nma\u1e33\u00e2m\u00e2 of \u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee (de Sacy, 2nd ed. p. 673. 2,) it is even said that \u2018the\ntooth of the daybreak laughs\u2019 (ibtasama tha\u0121r al-fajr), i.e. becomes\nvisible, as the teeth of a person laughing become visible. This mythic\nview has become so incorporated in the Arabic language that the word\n_baza\u0121a_, denoting that the teeth are prominent, is also used of the\nrising of the sun. In a small Arabic tract[256] by the Sheikh \u02bfUlw\u00e2n b.\n\u02bfA\u1e6d\u00eeyy\u00e2 of \u1e24am\u00e2, which brings forward the contest between Day and Night,\na subject not infrequent[257] in Oriental literature, in which the two\nchampions engage in a battle of respective excellence in prose and\npoetry, there also occurs a passage suitable for quotation here. The\nNight says in the course of her dispute: \u2018To the string of these thy\nblameworthy qualities this must yet be added\u2014that thou art changeable\nand many-coloured in thy various conditions, and not stedfast; thy\nbeginning contradicts thy end, and thy interior is different from thy\nexterior. O what an utterly culpable quality is this, which scratches\nout the face of every merit! _Thou laughest at thy rising_, when thou\nrememberest weeping and mourning; and at thy extinction thou clothest\nthyself in thy most gorgeous of raiments, instead of putting on mourning\ngarments.\u2019 And the Day replies, in his own defence to his black\nantagonist: \u2018What rank takest thou in comparison with me? What is thy\ngloominess and thy sombre seriousness in comparison with my _gay smiles_\n(\u1e0da\u1e25ik\u00ee wabtis\u00e2m\u00ee)?\u2019[258]\n\nIt is not only the clear shining sunny sky that is called by the Arab\npoet \u2018the Smiling;\u2019 this attribute is applied also to other luminous\nthings, e.g. to the glittering _Stars_ (not to the night-sky\nitself),[259] and to the Lightning, which is even called al-\u1e0d\u00e2\u1e25ik, \u2018the\nLaughing.\u2019 In the Romance of \u02bfAntar there frequently occurs the\nexpression \u2018the Lightning laughed\u2019 (al-bar\u1e33 ya\u1e0d\u1e25ak, e.g. XXIV. 65.\n6).[260] Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 al-Ma\u02bfarr\u00ee, an excellent Arabic poet, says in an\nelegy on the death of his father:\n\n I disapprove of merriment even in the _laughing_ (_i.e._ lightning)\n cloud,\n And let no cloud bring me rain, except a gloomy, dark one.[261]\n\nWe have in passing treated the words \u2018He who sits in heaven laughs\u2019 in\nthe second Psalm as a mythical reminiscence, which originally referred\nto the Sun, but then, like similar instances which we shall see, was\nemployed by the poet in another sense. But there is nothing to exclude\nthe possibility that the Laughter of him who sits in heaven may refer in\nthis passage not to the sweet smile of the bright sunny sky, but to the\nwild raging of the Thunderer, pictured in the myths as scornful\nlaughter, as F.L.W. Schwartz[262] shows by many examples from classical\nantiquity. This conception would also be more suitable to the context of\nthe passage in question in the second Psalm, where mention is made of\nderisive laughter. However this be, the \u2018Smiling one\u2019 whom the \u2018High\nFather\u2019 intends to slay, is the smiling day, or more closely defined the\nsmiling sunset, which gets the worst of the contest with the night-sky\nand disappears.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. The same myth is also given as follows: \u2018_Jephthah sacrifices or\nkills his daughter_.\u2019 In its later ethical or religious transformation\ngiven in Judges XI. 29\u201340, it is known to everyone. This story is\nespecially worthy of consideration in connexion with the science of\nMythology, because a Hebrew custom similar to the mourning for Osiris or\nAdonis and Tamm\u00fbz was fastened on to it, as appears in v. 40; and it is\nwell known that these latter rites stand in a very close connexion with\nphysical phenomena, and with the myth which speaks of these phenomena.\n\nWhat means Jephthah (Yipht\u00e2ch)? We have again an aorist form[263]\nexactly similar to Yi\u1e63ch\u00e2\u1e33; it denotes literally \u2018he opens, he begins,\u2019\nthence \u2018the opener or beginner.\u2019 For the understanding of this mythical\nperson we must note by anticipation that this Opener has a correlative\nin the After-follower Jacob (Ya\u02bfa\u1e33\u00f4bh), \u2018he follows his heels.\u2019[264]\nBoth these expressions belong to one group of mythic conceptions; and it\nis remarkable that in these designations we find mythology already\nadvanced to the stage which we characterised in the previous chapter as\nbelonging to the ideas of the Agriculturist. For these two names and the\ncycle of myths coupled with them presuppose the view that in the order\nof time the Day is the earlier and is followed by the Night; and the\nvery circumstance that the idea of time is impressed on these myths with\nsomething of precision (see above, p. 44), also indicates a relatively\nlate formation of these designations and of the views that led to them.\nThe Opener is the Sun, which first opens the womb (see Gen. XXX. 22; EX.\nXIII. 2, 12), while the Night is called the After-follower; just as in\nthe Rigveda (II. 38. 6) the Night follows on the heel of S\u00e2vitri. To\nestablish more certainly the meaning of the name Ya\u02bfa\u1e33\u00f4bh it may also be\nmentioned that in Arabic the participial form of the same verb, \u2018\u02bf\u00c2\u1e33ib,\u2019\nis exceedingly frequent in the same signification. According to\nMohammedan tradition one of the many names of the Arabian Prophet is\nAl-\u02bf\u00e2\u1e33ib, with the sense that Mo\u1e25ammed, the last of the prophets,\nfollowed after and concluded their line.[265] We will now first return\nto Jephthah, the _Opening Sun_. This conception of the Sun as Opener\nreceives a remarkable illustration in a passage of the Persian national\nepic by Fird\u00fbs\u00ee, in which occurs an expressive echo of this mythical\nview. The sun is there actually a _golden key_, which is lost during the\nnight.[266] As the lighting up of the sun is conceived as an\n_unlocking_, so the darkness is a _locking up_. \u2018Who commandeth the sun\nand it riseth not, and who locketh up the stars,\u2019 is said in Job IX. 7,\nof the God who brings on darkness. The solar character of Jephthah\nreceives confirmation from another side, but likewise on Semitic ground.\nIn the version of the Phenician Cosmogony furnished by Damascius[267] it\nis related, on the authority of Mochus, that the spiritual God Ul\u00f4mos\nbegot Chrysoros \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b3\u03ad\u03b1, \u2018the Opener.\u2019 The Sanchuniathon of Philo\nHerennius identifies this Opener with Hephaestus, who was the first\ninventor of iron implements (T\u00fbbhal-\u1e32ayin of the Hebrews). Now, although\nin its latest development this cosmogony does not pretend to mean\nanything else than the opening of the Egg of the world,[268] there can\nbe no doubt that this version belongs to a very late, perhaps the last\nphase of development of the myth which lies hidden in the background\u2014a\nstage at which all that makes the myth a myth is quite washed out and\nchanged by the prevalence of theological ideas into an artfully\nsystematised cosmogony. But originally nothing else can have been\nunderstood by the Opener than the firstborn brother of the pair, Sun and\nNight. Another mythic trait which we know of this Opener testifies to\nhis solar signification in the myths on which the Phenician cosmogony\nwas based. Philo Herennius\u2019 authority, who calls the opener _Chrys\u00f4r_,\nsays of him: \u2018He was the first man who fared in ships.\u2019 This trait,\nwhich is far from fitting into the frame of the portrait of Hephaestus\npresents a very attractive and simple conception held by the men of the\nmyth-forming age. We generally find in myths of the rising and setting\nof the sun, that the view which lives longest and conforms most\nnaturally to the nature of the phenomenon is that the rising sun ascends\nout of the river or the sea, and that the setting sun sinks into the\nwater.\n\n The gaudy, blabbing, and remorseful day\n _Is crept into the bosom of the sea_,\n\nas Shakespeare says,[269] or as a German poet, feeling an echo of the\nmeaning of the old myth, speaks still more expressively:\n\n \u2018\u2014that the sun was only\n A lovely woman, who the old sea-god\n Out of convenience married;\n All the day long she joyously wander\u2019d\n In the high heavens, deck\u2019d out with purple\n And glitt\u2019ring diamonds,\n And all-beloved and all-admired\n By every mortal creature,\n And every mortal creature rejoicing\n With her sweet glance\u2019s light and warmth;\n But in the evening, impell\u2019d, all-disconsolate,\n Once more returneth she home\n To the moist house and desert arms\n Of her grey-headed spouse.\u2019[270]\n\nIn a Swedish popular song, a King of England has two daughters, the\nelder _black as night_ (Night itself); the other, younger, _beautiful\nand brilliant like the day_ (Day itself). The latter goes forward\nfollowed by the other, who comes and throws her into the sea.[271] In\nthis popular story, also, the sunset is viewed as a fall into the sea;\nbut one new feature is here added, viz., that the two sisters fight, and\nthe black one, the dark Night, throws the brilliant Sun into the sea. In\nthe morning the Sun that had fallen into the sea rises up again out of\nher night\u2019s quarters. The Roman poet expresses the idea \u2018Never did a\nfairer lady see _the sun arise_,\u2019 by the words:\n\n Ne qua femina pulchrior\n Clarum _ab Oceano diem_\n Viderit _venientem_;[272]\n\nand because the sun rises out of the water, a Persian poet[273] calls\nwater in general \u2018the Source of Light (tsheshmei n\u00fbr).\u2019 Connected with\nthese ideas is that of the so-called _Pools of the Sun_,[274] which are\nassigned to the rising and setting sun alike.[275] But the morning sun\nis also made to come forth out of _mud_ and _morass_ (as in Homer from\nthe \u03bb\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7), as is described amongst others in the Arabic tradition.[276]\nIt is obvious that this conception must have first arisen in countries\nwhose horizon was not bounded by the sea. The same assumption must be\nmade with regard to another conception also, found in the African nation\nof the Yorubas. These regard the town Ife as a sort of abode of gods,\n_where the Sun and Moon always issue forth again from the earth in which\nthey were buried_.[277] No doubt this notion was formed among the\nportion of the nation that lived at a distance from the sea. A\nconsiderable part of the elements of the animal-worship which refers to\nwater animals may be traced back to mythological conceptions which we\nhave exhibited above.[278]\n\nWhen in ancient times men dwelling by the sea-shore saw the heavenly\nfire-ball in the evening dip into the sea, and the next morning issue\nshining at the opposite point of the sea-line, what other idea could he\nconceive of this but that down in the sea the sun was swallowed by a\nmonster which spat out its prey again on the shore (see p. 28)?\u2014or else\nthat the sun undertook a voyage, starting over night?\u2014or, as is so\nbeautifully expressed in the Hellenic myth, that he took a bath, so as\nto shine on the sea-shore in the morning with new brightness and\npurified from all dinginess?\n\n_Navigation_ is the explanation of this daily phenomenon which prevails\nin the myth. It became so general that later among the Egyptians it was\ndivested of its original associations and brought into connexion with\nthe sun of day. In the Egyptian view the Sun\u2019s bark sails over the ocean\nof heaven:[279] \u1f2d\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f05\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f01\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c7\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b5\u03af, says Plutarch of the Egyptian view,[280] and\nadduces Homeric parallels.[281] The Jewish Midr\u00e2sh compares the course\nof the sun to that of a ship\u2014and curiously enough to a ship coming from\nBritain,[282] which has 365 ropes (the number of the days of the solar\nyear), and to a ship coming from Alexandria, which has 354 ropes (the\nnumber of the days of the lunar year).[283] The solar figures, then, are\neverywhere brought into connexion with the invention and employment of\nnavigation. The sinking Apollo is with the Greeks the founder of\nnavigation. Herakles receives from Helios the present of a golden bowl,\nwhich he used to employ as a bark when he sailed across the Okeanos. The\nvoyage of the shining (\u03c6\u03b1\u03af-\u03bd\u03c9) Phaeacians and Argonauts originally\nsignified only the same sea-passage, which the sun makes every evening.\nOf Charon himself, the subterranean ferryman (whose name, Schwartz\nthinks, indicates his solar significance, \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2) it has also been\nproved that his subterranean navigation is only an eschatological\ndevelopment of the solar myth.[284] Indeed, eschatology and conceptions\nof the things after death and resurrection have their essential origin\nin the Sun\u2019s voyage under the sea and reappearance on the other\nside.[285] The Roman Sun-god Janus is also brought into connexion with\nnavigation; this idea is unmistakably expressed on coins which bear the\nimage of the two-headed god,[286] and is especially important here\nbecause Janus himself, as the etymology of his name declares, likewise\nbelongs to the series of \u2018Openers.\u2019 \u2018This name was given him,\u2019 says\nHartung, \u2018because the door represents in space exactly what formed the\nbasis of his essence with regard to the relations of time and force. For\nevery beginning resembles an entrance.\u2019[287] The most prominent figure\nof the lately discovered Babylonian epos, Izdubar, and \u00dbr-B\u00eal (the Light\nof B\u00eal, _i.e._ the Sun), both of them purely solar figures, are provided\nwith ships.[288] We cannot justly doubt, it is true, the historical\ncharacter of the Biblical prophet Jonah. But, from what was discussed in\nthe Second Chapter, this does not exclude the possibility that various\nmythical features may have been fastened on this undoubtedly historical\npersonage, as is the case with many other persons of Hebrew history, for\nexample, most strikingly with David. The most prominent mythical\ncharacteristic of the story of Jonah is his celebrated abode in the sea\nin the belly of the whale. This trait is eminently solar and belongs to\nthe group on which we are now engaged. As on occasion of the storm the\nstorm-dragon or the storm-serpent swallows the sun, so when he sets he\nis swallowed by a mighty fish, waiting for him at the bottom of the sea.\nThen when he appears again on the horizon, he is _spit out on the shore_\nby the sea-monster.[289]\n\nAccordingly, when Chrys\u00f4r is said to have been the _first navigator_,\nthis must have the same meaning that it has when applied to Apollo, viz.\nthat the Sun, sinking and going down into the ocean, is taking a journey\nby sea; or when applied to the Tyrian Herakles, the builder of the city\n(building of cities we shall see to be a specially solar\ncharacteristic), called the _inventor of navigation_;[290] or when used\nof Prometheus, recounting before the descendants of Okeanos his benefits\nconferred on mankind, and saying:\u2014\n\n \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03c9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5,\n \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n Learn, in a word, the sense of all I mean:\n Prometheus gave all arts to mortal men;\u2014\n\nwithout forgetting to allude to the ships:\u2014\n\n \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03cc\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u2019 \u03b5\u1f57\u03c1\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f40\u03c7\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n The seaman\u2019s chariot roaming o'er the sea\n With flaxen wings none other found\u2014\u2019twas I.[291]\n\nNow if this trait raises the solar character of Chrys\u00f4r to a certainty,\nthen it cannot be doubted that his epithet the \u2018Opener,\u2019 which is\nidentical with the Hebrew name Yipht\u00e2ch (Jephthah) is an appellation of\nthe Sun\u2014the First-born. The Sun sacrifices his own daughter. In the\nevening the sunset sky is born from the lap of the sun, and in the\nmorning, when in place of the red sunrise (which the myth does not\ndistinguish from the red sunset) the hot midday sun comes forth,\nJephthah has killed his own daughter, and she is gone.\n\nThus we see in the myths of Abram and of Jephthah the two sides of the\nsame idea, each having its peculiar form and frame: the former tells of\nthe victory of the Night, the dark sky of night over the Sun, the latter\nof that of the Dawn over the shades of Night. In Hebrew mythology the\nname Enoch (Chan\u00f4kh) belongs to this series. It was very happily\nexplained by Ewald[292] as denoting the Beginner, _inceptor_, and is\ntherefore a strict synonym of Jephthah.\n\nWe meet with one other \u2018Opener\u2019 on Semitic ground, the Libyan and\nespecially Cyrenaic god of agriculture, whose name is preserved in the\nGrecized form Apt\u00fbchos (\u1f08\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2). Blau[293] has already connected the\nname with the verb p\u00e2thach \u2018to open,\u2019 as opener of the ground by the\nplough. We must here refer in anticipation to the following chapter,\nwhich will elucidate the connexion in which the ancient religions put\nthe rise of agriculture with the personages of mythology; and such a\npersonage this Libyan \u2018Opener\u2019 undoubtedly is. Anyhow, we must hold fast\nto the identity of Apt\u00fbchos (\u1f08\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2) and Jephthah.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. The myth of the death of Isaac, and that of his later life, which\nof course presupposes that he continued to live, are not contradictory\nto the mythical mind. At a more advanced stage of intellectual life,\nwhich had lost all share in and understanding of the nature-myth, and\nthe mythical figures became _epic persons_, this contradiction\nnecessitated an arrangement or harmonising process; and in this lies the\nreason for the origin of the turn which occurred in the historical form\nof the legend of Isaac, substituting for the accomplished homicide an\n_intended_ homicide; which latter, when religious feeling began to rule\nover the still existing mythic materials, became later simply an act of\npious willingness to perform a sacrifice. Such contradictions do not\npresent themselves distinctly to the mind of men at the stage of the\nactual formation of myths. The slain Isaac appears again on the arena a\nfew hours after he was killed; he shews himself afresh. Some fifteen\nyears ago when a Christian mission penetrated to the Central-African\ntribe of the Liryas, a great crowd collected round a priest, who began\nto expound to them the main principles of his religion. \u2018But when he\ncame to the attributes of God, they absolutely refused to allow that he\nis very good. On the contrary, they said, he is very angry, and even\nbad, for he sends death; he is the cause of dying, and sends the sun,\nwhich always burns up our crops. _Scarcely is one sun dead in the west\nin the evening, than there grows up out of the earth in the east next\nmorning another which is no better._\u2019[294] In this story we see the\nbeginning of the transition from the formation of myths to religious\nreflexion: the sun that appears in the morning in the east is a\ndifferent one from that which fell dead to the earth in the evening in\nthe west. Yet, though substantially it is a different one and not\nidentical with that of the previous day, it is still perfectly like it,\nand qualitatively not distinct from it. At the mythical stage, when it\nwas still productive, Isaac reappearing is the same as Isaac already\nkilled. He appears again several times; he marries Ribh\u1e33\u00e2 (Rebekah); and\nagain we meet him old and blind \u2018with weakened eyes,\u2019 sending his son\nYa\u02bfa\u1e33\u00f4bh (Jacob) into a foreign land, to return only after the death of\nthe old blind \u2018Smiling\u2019 one, with a large family, and prepared to take\nup again his old quarrel with his hairy brother Esau, the hunter. The\nliving myth does not treat these events as following one after the\nother. To work up together the various members of the group of myths\nwhich assemble round a common centre or a common name, is not the\nbusiness of the myth proper. The _epic_ impulse first begins to act in\nthis direction, and gives the first incitement to the harmonising of\nmyths.\n\nWe will linger a few minutes longer with Isaac.\n\nHe loves and marries Rebekah, or as she is called in the Hebrew text,\nRibh\u1e33\u00e2. The Dutch historian of religions C.P. Tiele sees in this name an\nappellation of the fruitful, rich _earth_,[295] a view which is\npartially supported by the etymology of the word. \u2018The laughing sky of\nday or the Sun-god (surely originally only the Sun?) is united in\nmarriage with the fatness and fruitfulness of the earth.\u2019 This\nconception of the myth, notwithstanding its etymological correctness,\nhas little to recommend it to my feeling, but I cannot propose any\nbetter in its stead. I only add, that if Tiele\u2019s conception is correct,\nwe shall certainly understand better the feature of the myth which makes\n\u2018the Laughing one\u2019 (Isaac) of his two sons prefer Esau (who will be\nproved to be a solar character), while the mother\u2019s love attached itself\nmore to Jacob. Esau is a mythical figure homogeneous with Isaac; but the\nfruitful earth is more closely connected with the dark rainy sky, as a\nkindred and homogeneous phenomenon.\n\nAnother notable point in the myth of Isaac is blindness. \u2018And when Isaac\nwas old, his eyes became too dim to see\u2019 (Gen. XXVII. 1). It is an idea\npeculiarly mythical (which found an echo in poetry), to regard the Sun\nas an Eye, which looks down with its sharp sight upon the earth. In the\nEgyptian monuments and in the Book of the Dead the Sun is often\nrepresented as an eye, provided with wings and feet. To the same\nconception are also due the so-called mystic eye which is often met with\non Etruscan vessels of clay, and the part played by the eye in the\nrepresentation of Osiris.[296] The sun is called in the Malacassa\nlanguage _masovanru_, and in Dayak _matasu_, both of which expressions\ndenote _oculus diei_.[297] In the Polynesian mythology the sun is the\nleft eye of Tangaloa, the highest god of heaven, hence the Eye of\nHeaven.[298] The sun accordingly possesses also the attributes of the\neye. Thus in the Hebrew poetry we meet with the _Eyelashes_[299] (i.e.\nrays) of the Dawn, \u02bfaph\u02bfapp\u00ea shachar (Job III. 9, XLI. 10), as in the\nGreek with \u1f01\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd (Soph. _Ant._ 104),[300] and in the Arabic\nwith \u1e25aw\u00e2jib al-shams. This notion has so completely become an idiom of\nthe Arabic language, where the mythical force of the \u2018sun\u2019s eyelashes\u2019\nhas retired into the background, that we even find the singular: \u2018the\nsun\u2019s eyelash is risen,\u2019 (\u1e6dala\u02bfa \u1e25\u00e2jib al-shams) or \u2018set\u2019 (\u0121\u00e2ba \u1e25\u00e2jib\nal-shams).[301]\n\nAmong more recent poets Shakespeare is most familiar with the expression\n_eye, eye of heaven_, as descriptive of the sun:\n\n Though thy speech doth fail,\n One eye thou hast to look to heaven for grace;\n The sun _with one eye_ vieweth all the world.\n _King Henry VI._ Pt. I. I. 4.\n\n Or with taper light\n To seek the beauteous _eye of heaven_ to garnish.\n _King John_, IV. 2.\n\n All places that the _eye of heaven_ visits\n Are to a wise man ports and happy havens.\n _King Richard II._ I. 3.\n\n When the _searching eye of heaven_ is hid\n Behind the globe and lights the lower world,\n Then thieves and robbers range abroad unseen.\n _King Richard II._ III. 2.\n\nHence also the Dawn is spoken of as _looking about_:\u2014\n\n Who is this that looketh forth as the morning?\n _Song of Songs_, VI. 10.\n\nAt the theological stage the mythical view was subjected to several\nalterations. The holy book of the Parsees[302] calls the sun the _Eye of\nAhuramazda_. Many regard the name \u02bfAnamelekh, who from 2 Kings XVII. 3\nwas a deity of the inhabitants of Sepharvaim (the Babylonian Sipar of\nthe cuneiform Inscriptions), expressly designated in the national\ndocuments a solar town,[303] as contracted for \u02bf\u00can ham-melekh, i.e. _Eye\nof the Sun-god Melelkh_, and so probably the sun itself.[304] Even in\nthe speech of a late Hebrew prophet (Zech. IV. 10) we find the same\nview, somewhat modified: \u2018_These seven are the eyes of Jahveh_, that run\nover the whole earth.\u2019 Here Jahveh\u2019s eyes are undoubtedly to be referred\nto the sun, and the number seven allows us to think of the seven days of\nthe week.[305] Similarly, it is said in the Atharvaveda IV. 16. 4 of the\nmessengers of Varu\u1e47a; \u2018descending from heaven they traverse the whole\nworld, and _inspect the whole earth with a thousand eyes_.\u2019[306] To the\nsame tendency we must attribute names of places such as _\u02bf\u00can Shemesh_,\n\u2018Sun\u2019s Eye,\u2019 (e.g. Josh. XV. 7), and the Egyptian Heliopolis, Arabic\n\u02bfayn shams;[307] which suggests the obvious conjecture that the Hebrew\n\u02bfIr ha-cheres \u2018city of the sun\u2019 was originally and more correctly \u02bf\u00can\nha-cheres. The emendation affects only the final consonant \u05e8.[308]\n\nThe Indian singer (Rigveda I. 164. 14), says that the sun has a sharp\nsight, and the same idea is preserved in a relic of Hebrew mythology,\nwhich has attached itself to an historical person. Of King David, an\nhistorical hero, it is written among other features borrowed from the\nmyth of the Solar hero (to which also must belong the idea that he takes\nthe life of his _giant_ adversary by _hurling stones_), that 'he was\nruddy, with beautiful eyes, and a good sight, adm\u00f4n\u00ee \u02bfim yeph\u00ea \u02bf\u00eanayim\nwe-\u1e6d\u00f4bh r\u00f4\u02be\u00ee' (1 Sam. XVI. 12). The red colour itself which is praised,\nsince the narrator evidently wishes to characterise David\u2019s\nhandsomeness, shows us that these traits cannot have been invented\ndirectly for the hero of this story; for it can scarcely be proved that\nthe Hebrews in ancient times considered reddishness an element of\nbeauty. But the red colour is admirably fitted to figures of the solar\nmyth, as we shall have further occasion to observe in the course of this\nchapter. With this are connected the beautiful eyes and the good sight,\nwhich are certainly taken from the mythical description of the blazing\nmidday sun. They are the relics of a mythic cycle only preserved in\nfragments, and have been tacked on to the portraiture of an historical\nhero, who had, like the Solar hero, to fight with a hostile giant. When\nthe sun appeared at noon with a red glow at its highest point in the\nheaven, the men of old said \u2018The Red one is looking down on the earth\nwith his perfect eyes and sharp sight.\u2019 And he viewed the diminution of\nthe solar rays and heat as a weakening of his sight, which ended at\nsunset with total blindness. Samson (Shimsh\u00f4n), the hero whose solar\ncharacter Steinthal has raised above all doubt, ends his heroic career\nby being made blind. In the Greek mythology the significance of one-eyed\nand blinded persons is exhibited with equal clearness.[309] This\nmythical idea is very clearly reflected in language. In Arabic, for\nexample, i\u1e6dlachamma or i\u1e6drachamma signifies both _oculos hebetiores\nhabuit_ and _obscura fuit_ [nox]. The verb a\u0121dana, from which a\u0121dan is\nderived, which is used of suffering from certain eye-diseases, expresses\nthe idea of darkness, and the word inchasafa unites the two meanings _to\nbe eclipsed_ (of the moon) and _to lose one\u2019s sight_. Hence the\nexpression, al-leyl a\u02bfwar, \u2018the night is one-eyed.\u2019[310] It becomes\nclear from all this what is the meaning of the mythical words, \u2018And when\nIsaac was old, his eyes became too dim to see.\u2019 It may also be mentioned\nhere that Shakespeare calls night the _eyeless_:\u2014\n\n Thou and eyeless night\n Have done me shame.\n _King John_ V. 6.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. The battle of the Day with the Night is still more frequently\nrepresented as a _quarrel between brothers_. At the very threshold of\nthe earliest Biblical history we meet a brothers\u2019 quarrel of this kind,\nthe source of which is the nature-myth, spread out among all nations of\nthe world without exception. It is not difficult to prove that Cain\n(\u1e32ayin) is a solar figure, and that Abel (Hebhel) is connected with the\nsky dark with night or clouds. Here, as everywhere, investigation must\nof course be guided by the nature of the personages in question, by the\nmatter of the story, and by the appellative signification of the names.\nCain is an agriculturist, Abel a shepherd. We have demonstrated in the\npreceding chapter that agriculture always has a solar character, whereas\nthe shepherd\u2019s life is connected with the phenomena of the cloudy or\nnightly sky. Shepherds in mythology are figures belonging to the dark or\noverclouded sky; whereas huntsmen and agriculturists are solar heroes.\nThe heaven at night is a great tent or a group of tents, with a great\npiece of pasture close by, where the herds (the clouds) are driven to\nfeed. In German, to be sure, the expression _Himmelszelt_ (heaven\u2019s\ntent) is also used of the heaven by day, but this is a generalisation of\nthe original limitation to the nocturnal and cloudy sky. This limitation\nis still acknowledged in the Hungarian language, where _s\u00e1toros \u00e9j_ is\nsaid, \u2018the tented (provided with many tents) night;\u2019 e.g. by V\u00f6r\u00f6smarty\nat the commencement of the second canto of his national epic \u2018Zal\u00e1n\nFut\u00e1sa\u2019 (the Flight of Zal\u00e1n). And in Arabic, \u2018Night spread out its\ntent, and there arose thick darkness,\u2019 is quite a familiar\nexpression.[311]\n\nThe shepherd Abel (Hebhel) is accordingly a figure of the dark sky. This\nis proved also by the signification of the name. For it denotes neither\n_childlessness_, as some try to explain it by the help of Arabic, and on\nthe supposition that the first parents anticipated their son\u2019s future\nfate on giving his name, nor simply _son_, being explained from the\nAssyrian. The Hebrew language itself is adequate to establish the proper\nsignification. The word denotes in Hebrew a \u2018breath of wind;\u2019[312] and\nthe wind stands in connexion with the dark sky. Another modification of\nthe same appellation is known to Hebrew mythology. As in other classes\nof language _h_ and _y_ may interchange dialectically, so here beside\nHebhel (Abel) we have Y\u00e2bh\u00e2l (Jabal). This latter appellation is\netymologically either identical with the former, or if not, at least its\nmythological identity can scarcely be questioned. Y\u00e2bh\u00e2l (from whence\ncomes mabb\u00fbl, \u2018body of water,\u2019 hence of the Deluge) signifies Rain (like\nIndra). Rain and Wind are both attributes of the dark sky and the\nnight-sky. In Arabic the verb \u0121asa\u1e33a denotes both the darkness of the\nsky, and the rain, and (what exactly suits the mythical circle of ideas)\nthe flowing of milk from the udder. The rain is to the men of the\nmyth-creating age a milking of the cloud-cows, which the shepherd leads\nout to pasture by night on the heavenly meadows. The verb a\u0121\u1e0dana, of\nwhich Freytag, following al-Jauhar\u00ee, gives only the meaning _perpetuo\npluit coelum_, is known to the classical lexicographer of Arabic\nsynonyms also in the sense _it is dark night_. Similarly, a\u0121\u1e0dafa denotes\nboth _obscura, atra fuit nox_ and _ad pluviam effundendam paratum et\ndispositum fuit coelum_. In poetry also rain is often attached to night:\nan old poet quoted by Ibn al-S\u00eekk\u00eet says,[313] \u2018A dark night, during\nwhich a drenching rain pours down upon the streets.\u2019[314]\n\nThe identity of Abel and Jabal appears conspicuously in another\ncircumstance. Abel is introduced as a Herdsman. In the system of the\nharmonising genealogy of Genesis, in which Jabal appears some\ngenerations later, he is described as the \u2018_Father of those that dwell\nin tents and with cattle_\u2019 (Gen. IV. 2, 20). Both features or rather\nthis identical feature told of both these Patriarchs, have a foundation\nand are equally true. But in the method of the critical school of\nBiblical exegesis these two accounts involve a contradiction which it is\nattempted to solve, either by the usual supposition of different\nnarrators, or by minutely pressing the literal meaning of words and\nsetting up delicate distinctions. The acute Knobel, for instance,\npretends to know that 'Even Abel had kept cattle, but only small cattle,\nand these only in his own district; Jabal invented the moving about with\ncattle from one district to another.[315] It concerns us not to know how\nfar Jabal extended the area of his pasture, and within what narrow\nlimits Abel confined his: our assumption of the mythological identity of\nthe two designations solves the inconsistency without any resort to\nminute distinctions.\n\nEqually clear is also the Solar character of the name Cain (\u1e32ayin). This\nword, which, with other synonymous names of trades, occurs several times\non the so-called Nabatean Sinaitic inscriptions,[316] signifies\n_Smith_,[317] maker of agricultural implements, and has preserved this\nmeaning in the Arabic \u1e33ayn[318] and the Aramaic \u1e33in\u00e2y\u00e2, whilst in the\nlater Hebrew it was lost altogether, being probably suppressed through\nthe Biblical attempt to derive the proper name Cain etymologically from\n\u1e33\u00e2n\u00e2 \u2018to gain.\u2019 In Hebrew therefore it appears only as the name of the\nfirst fratricide and of his duplicate Tubal-cain (T\u00fbbhal-\u1e33ayin), the\nbrother of Jabal, who is called the founder of the smith\u2019s trade (Gen.\nIV. 22), and stands to Cain in very much the same relation as Jabal does\nto Abel.\n\nCain is accordingly the same mythological figure as Hephaestus and\nVulcan with the Greeks and Romans. But there are some other points which\ndetermine his Solar character. First, there is the characteristic that\nafter the murder of his brother he built the first city, and called it\nEnoch (Chan\u00f4kh, Gen. IV. 17). We have seen above, and I shall show still\nmore clearly in the treatment of the Myth of Civilisation, that in the\nmyths of all peoples the Solar heroes are regarded as the founders of\ncity-life, and that a fratricide often precedes the building of the\ncity. The agricultural stage, which is connected with the Solar worship,\novercomes the stage of nomadic life, which holds to the dark sky of\nnight or clouds; and, after conquering the herdsmen, the surviving\nagriculturists build the first city. It will not surprise us if the\nsolution of the question raised by F. Lenormant, \u2018pour en suivre toutes\nles formes depuis Cain b\u00e2tissant le premi\u00e8re ville Hanoch apr\u00e8s avoir\nassassin\u00e9 Abel, jusqu'\u00e0 Romulus fondant Rome dans le sang de son fr\u00e8re\nRemus,\u2019[319] proves the consistency and universality of the ideas of\nmankind at the mythic stage in reference to this point. Whether the\nconnexion of the zodiacal figure of the Twins with this feature of the\nmyth is so close as this acute French scholar imagines, is an\nindependent question. The account of Cain as the first builder of a city\nis accordingly a testimony to his Solar character. But far more\nimportant testimony is afforded by the characteristic feature in the\nstory of Cain, that after the commission of the crime that fratricide,\nladen with the curse of Jahveh, has to be \u2018a fugitive and a vagabond in\nthe earth\u2019 (Gen. IV. 11). We will pause a little at this mythic feature,\nand passing beyond Cain, consider it in connexion with a larger group of\nmyths which exhibit the same.[320]\n\n\n\u00a7 5. The word which preeminently denotes the Sun in the Semitic\nlanguages, and which, when the abundant synonyms produced by mythology\nto designate the Sun had vanished, drove all other names of the Sun into\nthe background, viz. the Hebrew shemesh and the corresponding words in\nthe cognate languages, has been proved to descend from the etymological\nbasis of the idea of rapid motion, or busy running about. This original\nsense gives the point of connexion with the Aramaic terms shamm\u00eash \u2018to\nserve\u2019 and sh\u00fbmshem\u00e2n\u00e2 \u2018an ant.\u2019[321] The same function which language\nexhibits in the most prominent name of the Sun is also repeatedly shown\nin mythology.\n\nThe myth views the Sun from the point of view of his rapid course,\nhastening and continuous motion, or steady march forwards.\n\n Like a bridegroom coming out of the bridal chamber,\n Who exults like a hero to _run a course_.\n Ps. XIX. 6 [5].\n\nHence fiery, rapid horses are attributed to the Sun both in the\nclassical mythology and in Indian and Persian,[322] and no less so in\nthe Hebrew. The latter may be inferred from the fact that in the Hebrew\nworship in Canaan there were horses dedicated to the Sun. King Josiah,\nthe zealot for Jahveh, was the first to abolish this worship (2 Kings\nXXIII. 11). And Heinrich Heine gives the jesting couplet:\u2014\n\n Phoebus lashed his steeds of fire\n In the Sun\u2019s own cab with ire.[323]\n\nTo the same mythical conception must be referred the _Wings_ assigned to\nthe Sun or the Dawn, which are mentioned very frequently in the\nclassical mythology.[324] Just as the Egyptians and the Assyrians[325]\nin their monuments express this aspect of the sun by the picture of a\nwinged solar disc, so the Hebrews, although they did not give expression\nto their ideas in monuments and imitations which might have been\npreserved to the present time, have in the extant fragments of their\npoetical literature left behind them confirmation of the fact that they\nconceived of the Sun and the Dawn in the same way. As they called the\nwind \u2018winged,\u2019 so that the monotheistic singer imagines Jahveh as\n\u2018flying on the wings of the wind\u2019 (Ps. XVIII. 11 [10]), so he binds\nwings also to the rapidly increasing light of the Dawn:\u2014\n\n If I take the wings of the Dawn,\n And go down at the uttermost parts of the sea.[326]\n Ps. CXXXIX. 9.\n\nJahveh \u2018makes the Dawn _flying_\u2019 (literally _for flight_), as the\nprophet Amos (IV. 13) says. The prophet speaks in this verse of the\nregular phenomena of nature, not of exceptional physical changes, which\nwould allow us to take \u02bf\u00eaph\u00e2 as _obscuration_, as in Job X. 22; it is\ntherefore best to keep to the sense of _flying_. Joel (II. 2) says, \u2018As\nthe Dawn, spreading out her wings over the mountains.\u2019[327] Accordingly\nthe Dawn or the Sun is a bird, and the Persian expression mur\u0121-i-sa\u1e25ar\n\u2018Bird of the Dawn\u2019 becomes intelligible. When the sun sets, the runner\nhas stumbled and fallen to the ground; or the bird gliding through the\nair has lost its power of flight and fallen into the sea. Hence comes\nthe use of \u2018to fall\u2019 of the setting sun: _cadit sol_, and in\nHomer:[328]\u2014\n\n \u1f18\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2\u2019 \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f2a\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf,\n \u1f14\u03bb\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u03bd\u03cd\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b6\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nAnd in Arabic they say of the setting of the sun, wajabat al-shams, or\nhaba\u1e6dat al-shams,[329] verbs which are synonymous with wa\u1e33a\u02bfa, \u2018to\nfall.\u2019 We then understand (passing again to Hebrew) Isaiah\u2019s exclamation\n(XIV. 12), \u2018How art thou _fallen_ from heaven, _Light-bringer, son of\nthe Dawn_!\u2019\n\nAs the rising Dawn is said to spread out her wings, so the setting\nevening sun _drops_ her[330] pinions, bends her wings downwards. This\nexpression, a relic of the mythic view, is retained in the Arabic\nlanguage. The Arab says of the setting sun, jana\u1e25at; but although this\nverb according to the lexicons denotes _inclinavit_ in general, yet\nthere can be no doubt that this _inclinatio_ was originally something\nspecial, namely the bending of the wings, from whose name jan\u00e2\u1e25, indeed,\nthe above denominative verb is formed. \u1e24ass\u00e2n b. Th\u00e2bit,[331] a poet\ncontemporary with Mo\u1e25ammed, says, \u2018The sun of the day bent herself (i.e.\nbent her wings) that she might set\u2019 (wa-\u1e33ad jana\u1e25at shams-al-nah\u00e2ri\nlita\u0121rib\u00e2). But when wings are attributed to the Night, the basis of the\nconception is quite different from that which gives wings to the Sun or\nthe Dawn. In this case the thought is of covering and hiding.[332] In\nthis sense are to be understood such phrases as k\u00e2na-l-leyl n\u00e2shiran\najni\u1e25at al-\u1e93al\u00e2m, \u2018Night unfolded the wings of darkness,\u2019 or k\u00e2na-l-leyl\n\u1e33ad asbala \u02bfala-l-ch\u00e2fi\u1e33eyni ajni\u1e25at al-\u1e93al\u00e2m, \u2018Night had thrown down\nover the ends of the earth the wings of darkness.\u2019[333] The frequent\nexpression f\u00ee jun\u1e25 or jin\u1e25 al-leyl certainly belongs to this category.\nLexicographers who translate the word jun\u1e25 _pars noctis_, even on the\nauthority of native lexicons, e.g. al-Jauhar\u00ee, who explains it as \u1e6d\u00e2\u02beif\u00e2\nminhu \u2018a portion of it,\u2019[334] are mistaken. It must rather signify\n\u2018under the wings of Night,\u2019 which is also supported by the fact that,\nbesides jun\u1e25 al-leyl, f\u00ee jun\u1e25 al-\u1e93al\u00e2m is also found,[335] where _wings_\nonly can be understood.[336]\n\nFrom all this it is easy to perceive that the solar figures of the myth\nare brought into connexion with the idea of swiftness, flight, and\nconstant marching forwards; for rapid motion is one of the chief\nattributes of the Sun which naturally present themselves to the eye and\nthe mind. From this mythical view of the rapid running of the Sun may\nalso be explained a feature in the German mythology which Holtzmann[337]\nleaves unexplained. \u2018The _Osterhase_ [Easter-hare],\u2019 he says, \u2018is\ninexplicable to me; probably the hare is the animal of Ostara [the\ngoddess]; on the picture of Abnoba a hare is present.\u2019 If Ostara, as\nHoltzmann proves, is the sun or the sunrise, then the hare is easily\nexplained as indicating the quick-footed sun. The connexion of ideas\nrequired to bring the hare into connexion with this view is one that\nneeds no proof. In the hieroglyphs also, when there is free choice among\nvarious phonetic signs (e.g. with the vowel _u_), the figure of the hare\nis generally chosen when the word expresses a rapid motion.[338] So the\nRed Indians, in calling their Kadmus a great white hare, may have been\ninfluenced (independently of the false popular etymology of the word\n_michabo_[339]) by the conception of the Sun as a swift-footed\nhare.[340]\n\nAbraham and his wife Sarah (the princess or queen of heaven\u2014the Moon as\nwe shall see) expel Hagar (Gen. XVI. 6). The Moon is jealous of Hagar.\nWhat does Hagar signify in this Hebrew myth? The cognate Arabic language\noffers the most satisfactory basis of interpretation of this name.\nHajara, the root of the name H\u00e2g\u00e2r, denotes \u2018to fly,\u2019 and yields the\nword hijr\u00e2, \u2018flight,\u2019 especially known from the flight of Mo\u1e25ammed from\nMecca to Medina. The mythic designation H\u00e2g\u00e2r is consequently only one\nof the names of the Sun in a feminine form. The battle of the two\nfigures of the night-sky against Hagar is again that inexhaustible theme\nof all mythology, the battle of Day with Night. With respect to this\nparticular name the Arabic language gives us still further light. While\n\u0121a\u1e6dasha denotes both \u2018to be dark\u2019 and \u2018to move slowly,\u2019 the hot noonday\nsun is described by the Arabs by the participle of the verb from which\nwe have explained the name Hagar, _al-h\u00e2jir\u00e2_ or _al-hij\u00eer\u00e2_ \u2018the flying\none.\u2019 That this is not mere chance, but is connected with the mythical\norder of ideas from which we deduced the designation H\u00e2g\u00e2r for the Sun,\nis further confirmed by the word bar\u00e2\u1e25i or bir\u00e2\u1e25, also denoting \u2018flight\u2019\n(from the Hebrew and Arabic root _br\u1e25_ \u2018to flee\u2019), and yet belonging to\nthe nomenclature of the Sun.\n\nThe case is the same with the \u2018fugitive and vagabond\u2019 life of Cain;\nafter the conquest of Abel the Sun wanders from place to place, and\nleads a life of unrest and motion till night comes. A reminiscence of\nthe solar significance of Cain is even found in the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, which makes\nthe sign granted for the safety of Cain to consist in the brightening of\nthe sun; or, according to another interpretation, in a horn, which grew\nup on him from the moment of the promise.[341] It is well known that the\nsun\u2019s rays were mythologically called _horns_,\u2014a meaning which the\nlanguage preserved.\n\n\n\u00a7 6. With this group of Solar figures of the Hebrew mythology which are\nexhibited as _wandering_ or _rapidly marching forward_,[342] I also\nclass some others whose names alone lead us to recognise this\nmythological character. First and foremost we must consider a word which\nhas been retained in the language beyond the mythical stage: the Hebrew\nshachar, Arabic sa\u1e25ar, \u2018morning, dawn.\u2019 This word is doubtless connected\nwith the verb s\u00e2char, which denotes constant moving, wandering.[343] The\nArabic s\u00e2\u1e25ir \u2018magician\u2019 is the same word as the Hebrew s\u00f4ch\u00ear\n\u2018merchant,\u2019 both signifying originally those who are always travelling\nabout from place to place. The Hebrew verb shach\u00ear \u2018to seek\u2019 relates\noriginally to the _movement_ of one who has lost something and goes\nabout looking for it. Although in the course of this chapter I shall\ndevote a special connected disquisition to Jacob\u2019s sons, yet I must here\npick out a few beforehand to incorporate them in the class of solar\nfigures whose characteristic feature is that here discussed. To this\nclass belongs e.g. \u00c2sh\u00ear, the name of a son of Jacob by his concubine\nZilpah. The name cannot be explained (according to Gen. XXX. 13) as the\n\u2018Happy,\u2019 or \u2018Bringer of Happiness,\u2019 since this signification of the root\n(\u2018to be happy\u2019) is only secondary to the fundamental meaning\u2014applied,\nnot original. Language does not form originally expressions for ethical\nnotions of this kind, any more than the notion itself rises without\ncontact with something sensual, which may subsequently be transferred to\nthe ethical. The Arabic words for similar ideas spring up in a similar\nway, e.g. mu\u1e63li\u1e25 \u2018successful\u2019 denotes properly \u2018one who _penetrates_\nthrough something,\u2019 &c. The root of \u00c2sh\u00ear, in Hebrew \u00e2shar, in Arabic\nathara (whence athar \u2018a trace\u2019), originally denoted _to march, go\nforwards_ (Prov. IX. 6); intensively ashsh\u00ear, _to make_ some one _go\nforward, to lead_, and as a noun, ash\u00fbr \u2018way, path.\u2019 From the same root\ncomes also the relative pronoun asher, which originally signified\n_place_, (compare the Aramaic athar \u2018place\u2019); but we know that\nexpressions which serve as exponents of the category of _relation_, both\nin time and space, generally start from the conception of space, as is\nclearly seen in the Hebrew sh\u00e2m, indicating originally the idea of\nplace, \u2018there\u2019 but also transferred to the expression of the idea of\ntime, \u2018then.\u2019[344] We see the same quite as clearly in the employment of\nthe Aramaic athar in the combination b\u00e2thar (from ba-athar) to denote\n_after, afterwards_, properly _on the spot_.[345]\n\nTo this fundamental meaning of the root \u00e2shar \u2018to march, go forward\u2019 is\nadded the secondary application \u2018to be happy,\u2019 properly \u2018to advance\nprosperously.\u2019 But the old mythical designation \u00c2sh\u00ear is connected with\nthe original sense: since at the time when this mythical word was first\nspoken the verb had not yet obtained its secondary sense, nor could yet\nobtain it, as ethical ideas were still non-existent. Accordingly \u00c2sh\u00ear\nsignifies \u2018he who marches on,\u2019 and is simply a solar name. Thus the\nancient Hebrew called the Sun, when he noticed the continual change of\nhis place on the horizon, and observed his constant movement. \u2018Through\nAsher,\u2019 it is said, in a fragmentary hymn on Asher in Gen. XLIX. 20,\n\u2018his bread is fat; he gives dainties for a king;\u2019 for the sun is to the\nagriculturist the beneficent element that hastens the ripening of his\ncrops.\n\nThis simple and, I hope, obvious explanation throws light on another\nexpression in Hebrew mythology, which stands in the closest connexion\nwith Asher. I mean the feminine form derived from the masculine sun, the\nappellation Ash\u00ear\u00e2, on which Biblical interpreters and antiquaries have\nhad so much to say. Ash\u00ear\u00e2, as the feminine form of \u00c2sh\u00ear, denotes what\nthe Hebrews regarded as the marriage-consort of the Sun. We know this of\nthe Moon, as I hope to show more fully in speaking of Sarah. Ash\u00ear\u00e2 is,\ntherefore, an old Hebrew name of the Moon. In those passages of the Old\nTestament which speak of the idolatry of the Hebrews in Canaan, Asherah\nis named with Baal (the Sun-god): \u2018The vessels that were made for Baal\nand for Asherah and for all the host of heaven\u2019 (as though for Sun,\nMoon, and Stars), 2 Kings XXIII. 4; \u2018And the children of Israel did that\nwhich was evil in the sight of Jahveh, and forgat Jahveh their God, and\nserved Baal and Asherah,\u2019 Judges III. 7. They probably served Asherah\ntoo at the altar of Baal (see Judges VI. 25); but this is quite in the\nspirit of the Canaanitish and Mesopotamian religious practice. One mode\nof doing homage to the supreme God was to offer sacrifices and build\ntemples to his subordinate deity, just as any honour conferred on the\nSatraps conduced to the greater excellence of the \u2018King of kings.\u2019 This\nview is very general on the votive tables with cuneiform inscriptions;\nso e.g. in an inscription in the Temple of Mugheir: \u2018_In honore_ SIN\n_domini deorum coeli et terrae, regis deorum ... templum_ Iz _deae\nmagnae condidi et feci_.\u2019\n\nAsherah is accordingly the _Wandering one_, and the moon is here made\nfeminine. A masculine word for the Moon, which, being common to all the\nSemitic dialects (unlike the later, lebh\u00e2n\u00e2), must be one of the oldest\nSemitic names for _moon_, viz. y\u00e2r\u00eaach, expresses the same idea; for it\nis derived from the noun \u00f4rach, \u2018a path, way,\u2019 and stands for \u00f4r\u00eaach\nwith the initial hardened[346] (like y\u00e2ch\u00eed \u2018only,\u2019 with initial y, yet\nech\u00e2d \u2018one;\u2019 and y\u00e2sh\u00e2r \u2018straight,\u2019 connected with the root under\ndiscussion, \u00e2shar \u2018to go forwards\u2019). In Job XXXI. 26, the epithet\nh\u00f4l\u00eakh, \u2018marching,\u2019 is applied to the moon. Therefore the two plural\nforms ash\u00ear\u00eem and ash\u00ear\u00f4th are not identical (the former denoting\n_objects of worship_, and the latter as \u2018femininum vilitatis\u2019 declaring\nthem to be in the opinion of the writer _objects of abomination_);[347]\nbut the masculine form is derived from the singular \u00c2sh\u00ear, and the\nfeminine from the singular Ash\u00ear\u00e2.\n\n\n\u00a7 7. To the same series belong also the names D\u00e2n and D\u00een\u00e2, which latter\nis only a feminine to the first, and occurs again as a proper name in\nArabic.[348] It would be erroneous to regard the verb d\u00een \u2018to judge\u2019 as\nthe etymon: for this would give no solution of the question concerning\nthe nature and signification of the designations under review. Then, as\nthe Hebrew language itself offers no satisfactory _points d\u2019appui_, we\nare fully entitled to look for information to the cognate idioms. I\nbelieve that the fundamental idea contained in the group of consonants\n_Dn_ is extant in the Assyrian, where it expresses the idea of\n_going_;[349] whence the Arabic d\u00e2na \u2018to approach,\u2019 the secondary dana,\nand the adjective dunya, which denotes the near and visible world, in\nopposition to al-\u00e2chir\u00e2, the life beyond.[350] Consequently, D\u00e2n and\nD\u00een\u00e2 must denote \u2018he or she who marches on, or comes nearer,\u2019 or \u2018goes\u2019\nin general, synonymous with \u00c2sh\u00ear, i.e. the Sun. In Arabic also\nal-j\u00e2riy\u00e2 \u2018who goes\u2019 is one of the many names of the Sun which are\nenumerated by Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet in his Synonymical Dictionary of the Arabic\nLanguage.[351] Whilst of Dan no actual myth has reached us, and\netymology alone gives us any help in discovering his mythical character,\nof Dinah on the other hand the chief source of our knowledge of Hebrew\nantiquity has preserved a more material statement, telling of the love\nof Shechem for Dinah and their ultimate union, and of the immediately\nfollowing murder of Shechem by Jacob\u2019s sons. These are the features\nwhich come under our view when we draw out the mythical kernel from the\nmass of epical description surrounding it (Gen. XXXIV). From the\narguments of the Second Chapter the connexion of the noun shekhem with\nthe verb hishk\u00eem may surely be treated as removed beyond all doubt, as\nwell as the fact that this word is a designation of the Morning-dawn. I\nwill add at this place, to complete what was discussed at p. 26, that\nthe Hebrew word shekhem seems to be etymologically connected with the\nArabic thakam, which signifies \u2018way.\u2019 Like most Hebrew words denoting a\n_way_, this word shekhem must stand in connexion with the verbal idea of\n\u2018marching forwards\u2019\u2014either by the verb being a _denominative_ (like the\nGerman _bewegen_ from _Weg_), or inversely by the noun being a\n_deverbal_. The changes of consonants which we find here are in\naccordance with the law of the Semitic languages, namely:\n\n Arabic \u062b th Hebrew \u05e9\u05c1 sh Aramaic \u05ea t, th\n\n \ufe9b\ufedd\ufe8d\ufe9c\u0629 \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05dc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05d4 shel\u00f4sh\u00e2 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05ea\u05b8\u05d0 tel\u00e2th\u00e2\n thal\u00e2th\u00e2\n\n \ufe9b\u0648\ufeae thaur \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8 sh\u00f4r \u05ea\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8\u05b8\u05d0 t\u00f4r\u00e2\n\nTherefore also:\n\n \ufe9b\u0643\u0645 thakam = \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05db\u05b6\u05dd shekhem \u2014\u2014\n\nThe longing love of the Dawn for the Sun and her union with him\u2014the same\ntheme which Max M\u00fcller in his essay on \u2018Comparative Mythology\u2019 has so\ningeniously traced in Indian and Hellenic myths\u2014was told also by the\nHebrews; only that the Hebrew inverted the relation. When the Dawn\nvanished and the Sun began to shine bright in the sky, the Hebrew said\nof the union between the Dawn and the Sun that the Dawn snatched up the\nSun to himself and was united with her. Not long afterwards followed the\nvengeance taken by the sons of Jacob (the night-sky), who, enraged at\nthe abduction of their sister, murder the ravisher and deliver her. This\nis only the disappearance of the Sun, while the evening glow comes\nforward, again independent, to inaugurate the dominion of the\nNight.[352] The myth makes no distinction between the morning and the\nevening glow, but treats them as identical phenomena. Therefore Shekhem\nis made a son of the Ass (Cham\u00f4r); and there is no doubt that cham\u00f4r\n(ass) has here the mythic significance which accompanies that animal\nwhenever it appears in the Aryan mythology.[353]\n\nZilpah also, the mother of Asher, is to be classed in the same group.\nAny one who has cast even a superficial glance on the real meaning of\nthe myths of the Aryan nations, as now discovered and recognised, must\nhave noticed the peculiarity that the mythical relation of child to\nparent does not always indicate a succession of what should precede and\nwhat follow, but that the child is not unfrequently only a repetition of\nthe father or the mother, and is therefore to be considered identical\nwith them.[354] The present is a case of this kind. \u00c2sh\u00ear is only a\nrepetition of his mother. The designation Zilp\u00e2, the explanation of\nwhich has been sought in vain in Hebrew\u2014for the meaning \u2018a drop\u2019 can\nhardly be maintained\u2014finds a smooth and ready interpretation in Arabic,\nwhere zalafa, as well as _zlp_, _zlb_ in Assyrian,[355] denotes \u2018to\nmarch on.\u2019 So that Zilp\u00e2 also is \u2018she that marches forward.\u2019 Another\n\u2018marcher forward\u2019 is preserved by Arabian tradition, viz. Zal\u00eech\u00e2. She\nis unmistakably a solar figure, and her name (_zlch_ has the same\nsignification \u2018to march forward\u2019) is perhaps even formally\nconnected[356] with that of Zilp\u00e2, with whom she is identical. The\nbattle of the Sunshine with the Rainy Sky is the amorous contest of the\nbeautiful Zal\u00eech\u00e2 (or, as the name is commonly but erroneously\npronounced, Zuleych\u00e2) with Y\u00f4s\u00eaph \u2018the Multiplier.\u2019 Now, having been led\ninto the above digressions by the explanation of Cain\u2019s flight, we\nreturn to Cain again.\n\n\n\u00a7 8. We have just alluded to the fact that in the Hebrew mythology the\nfigures presented as children are frequently only _repetitions_ of one\nof their parents.[357] This observation is found to be confirmed in the\ncase of the posterity which the Biblical genealogy in Gen. IV. derives\nfrom Cain. Some of the descendants of Cain are quite as much solar\nfigures as their ancestor himself; and in an age which had advanced\nbeyond the stage of the formation of myths, and even beyond the\nafter-sentiment of mythology, this identity occasioned the idea that\nthese figures must stand in a genealogical connexion with the ancestor.\nThe same psychological process which in the employment of language\nproduces a specialisation or limitation in the sense of words originally\nsynonymous, is at work here also, forming from the numerous synonyms of\nmythology genealogies, in which identical designations, after their\nsubstratum has been personified, become his sons, grandsons, and\ngreat-grandsons. Thus among Cain\u2019s descendants none but solar figures\nare to be found. In the demonstration of this fact, I limit myself to\nthose names which can be interpreted without at all forcing their\nmeaning. The very first, Enoch (Chan\u00f4kh), the son of Cain, from whom he\nnames the first city he built, is of pure solar significance. We have\nabove already, with Ewald, put his name in the class in which the Sun is\npresented as the \u2018Opener.\u2019 The solar character of Enoch admits of no\ndoubt. He is brought into connexion with the building of towns\u2014a solar\nfeature. He lives exactly three hundred and sixty-five years, the number\nof days of the solar year; which cannot be accidental.[358] And even\nthen he did not die, but \u2018Enoch, _walked_ with El\u00f4h\u00eem, and was no more\n[to be seen], for El\u00f4h\u00eem took _him away_.\u2019 In the old times when the\nfigure of Enoch was imagined, this was doubtless called Enoch\u2019s\nAscension to heaven, as in the late traditional legend. Ascensions to\nheaven are generally acknowledged to be solar features. Herakles among\nthe Greeks, Romulus the city-founder among the Latins, and several\nheroes of American mythology,[359] agree in this. The same feature also\noften attaches itself even to historical persons\u2014e.g. to the legend of\nthe Prophet Elijah, the \u2018hairy man\u2019 who ascends to heaven on \u2018a chariot\nof fire and horses of fire,\u2019[360] indeed this as well as other mythical\nfeatures has been better preserved in the case of this favourite hero of\nIsraelitish prophecy than in that of the former purely mythical\npersonage.\n\nWachsmuth[361] expressed a conjecture that the old Greek god Helios, who\ndrives round the vault of heaven on a fiery chariot, has a share in the\nphenomenon, so frequent in modern Greece, that the prophet Ilias (Elias\nor Elijah) is especially venerated on mountain-tops. The temples and\naltars of Helios in ancient times were similarly situated on high hills;\nand the casual similarity of sound between Ilios and Ilias, together\nwith the identity of the myths concerning each, in this case caused the\nold heathen worship to be preserved and transferred to the name of the\nBiblical prophet. But this certainly cannot have taken place, as Otto\nKeller lately flippantly declared in a lecture on the \u2018Discovery of Troy\nby Henry Schliemann,\u2019 'from a sort of childish attention to the wants of\ngreat Prophet, inasmuch as the people wished to make the fiery journey\nas easy as possible for him, and therefore made him mount the chariot at\nthe nearest point to heaven.[362]\n\nEnoch (Chan\u00f4kh) is introduced in another version of the genealogy (Gen.\nV. 18), as son not of Cain but of Jered, who is separated by five\ngenerations from Seth, Adam\u2019s third son. But this genealogy has but\nlittle importance for mythological investigation; indeed its two chief\noriginal creations (Seth and Enos), do not belong to mythology at all.\nThe feeling of a later time rebelled against deriving all mankind from\nthe hated fratricide who bore the curse of God, and thus gave rise to\nthe two interpolated patriarchs and the Seth-genealogy, which runs\nparallel with that of Cain: moreover, in proof of the honourable origin\nof mankind, the son of Seth was made the author of the worship of\nJahveh, which is said to have begun in his time. The Seth-genealogy,\nwhich answered better to the feeling and the ethical need of mankind,\nthen utterly expelled the Cain-genealogy. The author of the Book of\nChronicles, who knows only Adam, Seth, Enos, &c. as first-fathers, seems\neither not to have known or intentionally to have ignored the other\ngenealogy, and keeps strictly to that in Gen. V. It is remarkable that\neven in the Seth-genealogy among the ancestors of Enoch a Cainan (\u05e7\u05b5\u05d9\u05e0\u05b8\u05df\n\u1e32\u00ean\u00e2n) is named\u2014a word which will be recognised by everyone who knows\nthe laws of the Semitic formation of words as a so-called nunnated form\nof the word \u05e7\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05df \u1e32ayin, so that the two are really perfectly\nidentical.[363]\n\nLet us continue the consideration of Cain\u2019s descendants. One prominent\nfigure is Lemech.[364] An obscure song, which he declaims before his two\nwives, has given the interpreters much trouble with regard both to its\nlanguage and to its subject; and legend has made free with this song, as\nit has with anything problematical. For us here this only is important,\nthat the song contains a self-accusation on the part of Lemech before\nhis wives, of having killed his own child. As Jephthah killed his\ndaughter, so the myth spoke of Lemech as a similar solar hero who killed\nhis child. The Sun today kills her child, the Night, whom she bore\nyesterday evening. Among the children of Lemech we actually find Jabal\n(Y\u00e2bh\u00e2l), of whom we have already spoken at length as denoting the Rainy\nSky. No doubt the ancient myth spoke of Jabal as the son who was\nmurdered by his solar father Lemech. Accordingly, the genealogy does not\ncontinue the line of Jabal. Next to him his brother Jubal (Y\u00fbbh\u00e2l),\ninventor of musical instruments, the Hebrew Apollo, is mentioned. It is\nto solar gods such as Apollo, and heroes, that the invention of music, a\nproduct of the settled mode of civilised life, was everywhere\nattributed. But his name seems to have been chosen only on account of\nits assonance to Jabal (a favourite practice with the Semites), and not\nto belong to the ancient myth, but to owe its origin to the later legend\nof civilisation.\n\nThat the brothers Tubal-cain and Jabal are only a repetition of Cain and\nAbel I think I have already made evident. It must here be added that the\nmother of Tubal-cain, the solar man, is named Zillah (\u1e62ill\u00e2), \u2018she who\n_covers_, _overshadows_\u2019\u2014the Night, mother of the Sun or of the Day. The\nSeth-genealogy concludes with one who is called son of Lemech\u2014Noah\n(N\u00f4ach), the founder of improved agriculture, who \u2018gave men rest from\ntheir work and the toil of their hands proceeding from the earth which\nJahveh cursed\u2019 (V. 29). What else can this mean, but that Noah invented\nagricultural implements? The Seth-genealogy accordingly disputes the\ninvention of these by Cain or Tubal-cain, and gives to the etymology of\nthe name N\u00f4ach, which really does denote \u2018rest,\u2019 an application which\nmakes it as impossible for it to belong to the ancient myth as for the\nnames Sh\u00eath and En\u00f4sh. Noah is a regular hero of the legend of\ncivilisation; and the larger part of what the myth tells of him is a\nproduct of the victory of Solarism, i.e. of agricultural life. He is the\nfirst vine-grower, and a new ancestor of the human race, since all\nmankind is derived from his three sons. The regular operation of the\nlaws of nature (Gen. VIII. 22), and social order and legality, are also\nbrought into connexion with him. The protection and forbearance, secured\nto the beasts by the Nomad, ceases; the Agriculturist subdues the\nbeasts. But, on the other hand, with him begins the protection and\nsecurity of human life (Gen. IX. 2\u20135). Yet side by side with this legend\nof civilisation we have in connexion with Noah a true _old_ solar myth,\nwhich well deserves attention. After the introduction of\nvine-cultivation Noah once makes overfree use of his discovery and gets\ndrunk; and in that condition \u2018uncovers himself\u2014takes off his clothes\n(Gen. IX. 21). Only this last feature has any mythological interest; for\nthe previous one, which was attached to this germ, belongs to another\nand later stage of formation of legends, since nothing could be told of\nintoxication till the free use of wine was known and practised. The word\nN\u00f4ach denotes 'him who _rests_.\u2019 While the Sun of Day is called \u2018he who\n_goes_, _runs_, _wanders_,\u2019 the Evening Sun, preparing to set, is \u2018he\nwho _rests_.\u2019 \u2018Noah uncovers himself:\u2019 after setting, the Sun is\nshrouded in a covering which darkens his light, but in the morning he\nthrows off the clothes and becomes visible, spreading light and\nbrightness abroad. In a hymn to Ushas, the Dawn, the ancient Indian poet\nsays that she \u2018uncovers her bosom\u2019 (Rigveda, VI. 64. 2, 10). If the\nintoxication is also to be accounted for, then this prominent\ncircumstance must describe the reeling motion with which the Sun,\nexhausted by his long course, staggers towards his repose. The Agadic\ntradition has preserved another element of the Noah-myth. The wicked\nblack son Ham (Ch\u00e2m), emasculates his father (Sanhedr\u00een, 70 a). The\nemasculation of the Sun, when the Sun is male, is an expression of Aryan\nmythology denoting the weakening of his rays before and at sunset.[365]\nThe black son, the Night, overcomes and emasculates his father, takes\nall power from his rays and drives him to ruin.\n\n\n\u00a7 9. Thus we find Cain\u2019s posterity to be repetitions of their ancestor,\nmere solar figures of the old myth, brought by an unmythological age\ninto a genealogical connexion with the wandering and fratricidal solar\nhero. It is the genealogy of the solar figures to which the data of the\nlegend of civilisation are attached; for the agriculturist always puts\ncivilisation into conjunction with the sun.[366] But besides this solar\npedigree, we possess also a nomadic one, starting from the myth of the\ndark Night-sky\u2014the genealogy of Abram (Gen. XI 10 sq.), which begins\nwith his ancestor Shem. But the name Sh\u00eam has the same signification as\nAbhr\u00e2m itself, according to the lexicon. As Abhr\u00e2m is the \u2018_High_\nFather,\u2019 so also the name Sh\u00eam denotes the \u2018High;\u2019 and from this name\nthe Semitic appellation of heaven, Hebrew sh\u00e2mayim, Arabic sam\u00e2, is\nderived. Like Abram, Abel, Jabal, Jacob, Lot &c., Shem too possesses\ntents. \u2018El\u00f4h\u00eem opens out (room) for Jepheth;[367] he (Jepheth) dwells in\nthe tents of Shem\u2019 (Gen. XI. 27), is said in the extant fragment of an\nancient hymn. Jepheth (Yepheth) signifies the \u2018Beautiful, Brilliant,\u2019 if\nit is connected with y\u00e2pheh; or \u2018who spreads himself out,\u2019 if the root\np\u00e2th\u00e2h is its origin; or \u2018who opens,\u2019 if with Gesenius and some later\nwriters we lay stress on the connexion of the sounds of p\u00e2th\u00e2h with\np\u00e2thach; but in any case it is a solar name. As the sun of the daytime\nis observed wandering from place to place, it is not an unnatural idea\nthat the sun takes up his abode in the _tents_ of high heaven. \u2018For the\nsun he made a tent in them (the heavens).\u2019[368]\n\nIt cannot be denied that in Abraham\u2019s genealogy, as given in the Book of\nGenesis, there occur some ethnographical appellations which have no\nmythological meaning (e.g. Arpachshad). Still, the majority of names are\nof a mythical character. Unfortunately, they must remain mere names to\nus, as no material myth connected with these names is extant. Although\nthey seem to invite etymological attempts, as e.g. the names Shelach and\n\u02bf\u00cabher, yet I shall resist the temptation, as it is not my business here\nto indulge in vague speculations. But I may be allowed to remark that\nthere is one sentence in this genealogy which reflects the nomad\u2019s life\nagain. \u2018Peleg begat Re\u02bf\u00fb:\u2019 that is, taking these words, as they were\noriginally understood, appellatively and translating them literally,\n\u2018The stream produces the pasture-land;\u2019 the nomad owes his meadow-land\nto the stream that meanders through the pasture and keeps the grass\nfresh and green. So instead of \u2018to lead the cattle to pasture,\u2019 he says\nalso, \u2018to lead them to the waters of rest.\u2019 The psalmist of Ps. XXIII.\n1, 2, says \u2018Jahveh is my shepherd, I want nothing. He makes me lie down\nin green pastures, he leads me to waters of rest.\u2019\n\n\n\u00a7 10. We will now continue our contemplation of the contests which the\nmyth tells of the sky at night, in which we have already seen the dark\nsky either conquering or conquered by his brilliant father or brother.\nOne of the most conspicuous names of the dark sky of night or clouds in\nthe Hebrew mythology, and containing a rich fund of mythical matter, is\nJacob. Etymologically we have already done justice to him. Now let us\nsee what the myth has to say of him. He endures hard struggles. His\nfather, \u2018the _laughing_ sunny sky,\u2019 loves him not. The hatred of his\nbrother Esau drives him from house and home; and at the place where he\ntakes refuge, he has to struggle against \u2018the white one\u2019 (L\u00e2bh\u00e2n), who,\nif not his brother, is at least his near relative, and in the original\nform of the myth was perhaps presented as his brother (see Gen. XXIX.\n15). We must examine more closely the mythical character of these two\nhostile brothers of Jacob. To make short work of it\u2014both Esau and Laban\nare solar figures. What we learn of them in the epic treatment of the\nold myth found in the Old Testament, presents a multitude of solar\ncharacteristics. We especially note this in Esau, whose _heel Jacob\ngrasps at their birth_ (Gen. XXV. 26). This mythical expression is in\nitself clear enough: \u2018Night comes into the world with Day\u2019s heel in his\nhand,\u2019 or, as we should say, Night follows close upon Day, driving him\nfrom his place. Nevertheless, we can further confirm this signification\nof the mythical expression for the benefit of hesitating doubters by\nshowing that the same conception is found even in the later Arabic\npoetry, where it is doubtless a residuum of an old mythical idea. For\nTha\u02bflab\u00e2 b. \u1e62u\u02bfeyr al-M\u00e2zin\u00ee[369] says of the breaking of the dawn: \u2018The\nshining one stretches his right hand towards him who covers up;\u2019 the Sun\nputs out his hand towards the Night, grasps him, and pulls him forward,\nwhilst he himself retires; here therefore it is the same relation, only\ninverted. Similarly, the poet al-\u02bfAjj\u00e2j says: \u2018till I see the shoulder\nof the brilliant dawn, when he springs upon the back of the black\nnight.\u2019[370] This is spoken in quite a mythical tone, and expresses the\nsame idea as the Hebrew when he said \u2018Jacob holds the heel of his red\nbrother in his hand,\u2019 only that the Arabic words quoted speak of day\nfollowing after night.\n\n\u2018Esau is a hunter, Jacob a herdsman, dwelling in tents.\u2019 _The Sun is a\nhunter_: he discharges his arrows, i.e. his rays, and does battle with\nthem against darkness, wind and clouds. Why should I adduce examples\nfrom Aryan mythology, where this view occurs in manifold variations and\nis one of the commonest?[371] The Sun\u2019s arrows are golden, wherefore\nApollo is called \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03be\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03cd\u03b8\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 (Pindar, _Ol_. XIV. 15). This\nmythical idea is frequently reflected in the composition of language. In\nEgyptian, the combination _st_ denotes \u2018flame, ray, and arrow,\u2019 all at\nonce; and the Slavonic str\u00eala, with which the German _Strahl_ \u2018ray\u2019 is\nconnected, means \u2018arrow.\u2019[372]\n\n\u2018The Sun can no longer bend his bow\u2019 = he has lost his power, is\ntherefore an expression for the setting of the sun. When Herakles finds\nhimself too weak to bend his bow and shoot his arrows, he feels that his\nend is approaching. When the Sun regains his powers at the outburst of\nspring, after a long winter in which his arrows had been at rest,\nOdysseus (Ulysses), a solar wanderer like Cain, seizes his bow to shoot\noff his shafts again.[373] We see the same in the myths of the Semites.\nAn epithet of the Sun-god B\u00eal is Nipru, which, according to Sir Henry\nRawlinson, signifies \u2018hunter;\u2019[374] and the city Resen, the building of\nwhich is attributed in the Bible to Nimrod, is called in the historical\ncuneiform inscriptions the \u2018City of the Hunter.\u2019[375] This Nimrod\nhimself, against whom Abraham the Nomad contends in the same sense in\nwhich Jacob the Nomad against Esau the Hunter, is a hunter (Gen. X. 9).\nThe etymological explanation of the name Nimr\u00f4d cannot be established\nuntil the really primary signification of the root m\u00e2rad has been\nsatisfactorily traced; for it may be considered certain, that at the\nmyth-creating stage mankind had no sense of the idea of \u2018insurrection,\u2019\nwhich could only be formed after some advance in social life, and could\nnot therefore endow a word with that special meaning. This signification\ncan consequently only be secondary and metaphorical.[376] As to the\ngrammatical form of the name Nimr\u00f4d, it is not impossible that, like\nYi\u1e63ch\u00e2k \u2018Isaac,\u2019 Yipht\u00e2ch \u2018Jephthah,\u2019 &c., it is a verbal form. If so,\nit would be the third person of the imperfect, formed by prefixing _n_,\nas in Aramaic. Schrader[377] regards this prefixed _n_ in Nimr\u00f4d as a\nsound used for the formation of _nouns_. I will also call to mind\nincidentally that on Babylonian ground we meet also with the name of a\ngod Mer\u00f4d.[378] The wars of Nimrod with Abraham are not preserved in the\nOld Testament, but are in Agadic tradition, which has also retained from\nthe Nimrod-myth an expression of a truly solar character; that _three\nhundred and fifty kings_ sit before Nimrod, to serve him.[379] Similarly\nagainst Joseph, the giver of increase, the rainy sky, fight \u2018the _men\nwith arrows_\u2019[380] (ba\u02bfal\u00ea chi\u1e63\u1e63\u00eem, Gen. XLIX. 23), \u2018who exasperate him\nand _shoot_ and persecute him.\u2019 So again Jacob fights against Esau the\n_hunter_. It is always the battle of the sky of Night and Clouds against\nthe Sun, who sends his arrows to repel the invader. One somewhat more\ncomplicated mythological conception having reference to the arrows of\nthe sun is found on Hebrew ground. The sun and the moon stand still, and\nthen go in the direction of the arrows which were sent off before them.\nThis view is known to poetry, except that there it is Jahveh who shoots\nthe arrows, so that the sun and moon\n\n Walk to the light of thy (Jahveh\u2019s) arrows,\n To the brightness of the glitter of thy spear.\u2014_Hab._ III. 11.\n\nThe rays of the moon also are here designated arrows.\n\n_Esau is a hairy man, Jacob a smooth man_ (Gen. XXVII. 11). \u2018_The first\ncame out red, quite like a hairy mantle_\u2019 (XXV. 25). For the present we\nwill put the redness aside, and pay particular attention to the element\nof hairiness. Long locks of hair and a long beard are mythological\nattributes of the Sun. The Sun\u2019s rays are compared with locks or hairs\non the face or head of the Sun.\n\nHelios is called by the Greeks the _yellow-haired_; and in Greek poetry\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2 or \u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u03bf\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2 is a frequent epithet of solar gods and\nheroes. A Latin poet also calls the sun\u2019s rays _Crines Phoebi_.[381] In\nan American legend the Sun-god Bocsika is introduced as an old man with\na long beard; the Viracochaya of the Peruvians, the Quetzalcoatl of the\nToltecs, the Coxcox of the Chichimecs, solar figures all of them,\npossess this strongly emphasized characteristic of the long beard.[382]\nIndeed, this feature is sometimes ascribed in popular fancy to\nhistorical personages, as e.g. to Julius Caesar, who was imagined to\nhave been born with long hair; and his name was popularly explained from\nthis circumstance\u2014_caesaries_.\n\nWe must here consider a point in the history of Art, which occupied\narcheologists about the years 1820\u201330, and especially the meritorious\nnumismatist Ekhel. I refer to the representation of Janus as _biceps_,\n_vultu uno barbato_, _altero imberbi_, which some regarded as the old\ntraditional conception of Janus, while others thought it comparatively\nmodern; the question of age is, however, not a question of principle at\nall.[383] In any case it may be assumed as probable that this picture of\nthe two-headed \u2018Opener,\u2019[384] is not an accidental idea, devoid of all\nmythical import; but that on the contrary, the two bearded and beardless\nrepresentations of the Sun-god express two points in the Sun\u2019s life; he\nappears in the morning and evening (as \u2018Opener\u2019 and \u2018Closer,\u2019 _Janus\nPatulcius_ and _Janus Clusius_) with smooth, beardless face, i.e.\nwithout powerful rays, but in the middle of the day with a large beard\nand hairy face.[385]\n\nWhen the Sun sets and leaves his place to the darkness, or when the\npowerful summer sun is succeeded by the weak rays of the winter sun,\nthen Samson\u2019s long locks,[386] in which alone his strength lies, are cut\noff through the treachery of his deceitful concubine Delilah, the\n\u2018languishing,[387] languid,\u2019 according to the meaning of the name\n(Del\u00eel\u00e2).[388] The Beaming Apollo, moreover, is called the Unshaven; and\nMinos cannot conquer the solar hero Nisos, till the latter loses his\ngolden hair.[389]\n\nIt is then clear what the description of Esau as a man born hairy in\ncontradistinction to the smooth Jacob denotes\u2014the same as the epithet\n\u00eesh ba\u02bfal s\u00ea\u02bf\u00e2r \u2018hairy man\u2019 (2 Kings I. 8) in the description of Elijah:\nthe rays of the sun, whose mythical representative Esau is. It is a more\ndifficult question whether the solar character of this hero is capable\nof proof from his name. If, not to have recourse to non-Hebraic\nlanguages, we derive \u02bf\u00cas\u00e2v from the Hebrew verb \u02bf\u00e2s\u00e2 \u2018to do,\naccomplish,\u2019 and explain it as the \u2018Accomplisher, Worker,\u2019 or the like,\nthen this description of a solar hero is suitable enough for a legend of\ncivilisation, which sees in the sun the power that brings to perfection\nthe corn and fruit, and produces in human society a legally secured\ncondition of social life, in short, the Perfecting Agent. But such a\ndescription is less consonant with the sense possible to the ancient\nmyth, in which the ideas and conceptions just mentioned were not yet\ndeveloped. If then the name \u02bf\u00cas\u00e2v cannot be etymologically explained in\nthe spirit of the oldest mythical circle of ideas, we are necessarily\ndriven to conjecture that the appellation does not belong to the oldest\nstratum of the materials of Hebrew legends, but was introduced by a\nlegend of civilisation. This conjecture appears all the more probable\nwhen we remember that Jacob\u2019s hostile brother in the Bible itself bears\nanother name besides Esau, much more expressive and suited to the\nearliest period of the formation of legends; namely, Ed\u00f4m \u2018the Red.\u2019 In\nlater times, when the original signification of the myths was entirely\nforgotten, these two names Esau and Edom were found in the story of the\nbrothers\u2019 quarrel, as appellations of the brother with whom Jacob\nfights. Attempts were made to harmonise them; and the name \u2018the Red\u2019 was\nconnected with the _red_ pottage (Gen. XXV. 30), as well as with the\nmore characteristic feature belonging to the old mythic stage, that the\nhostile brother was adm\u00f4n\u00ee, \u2018of a reddish colour.\u2019 But the name Esau\nalso can be rescued for the old myth, if we connect this name with the\nArabic a\u02bftha \u2018hairy,\u2019 which is etymologically related to the name\nEsau.[390] Thus the name Esau would come in contact with the\nabove-discussed mythic characteristic of the Solar hero, that he is an\n\u00eesh s\u00ea\u02bf\u00e2r, a hairy man.[391] In the Phenician mythology the antagonist\nof Usov (whom those who do not utterly reject the authenticity of the\nstatements of Sanchuniathon identify with Esau) lives in tents and is\ncalled Sh\u00e2m\u00eenr\u00fbm \u2018the high heaven,\u2019[392] i.e. the dark night-sky. The\nidentity of the conceptions _Abh-r\u00e2m_ and _Ya\u02bfak\u00f4bh_ would find further\nconfirmation here. We are led to a different series of solar\ncharacteristics by the name Ed\u00f4m, an unquestionably ancient designation\nof the Solar hero. We will consider together the names Ed\u00f4m and L\u00e2bh\u00e2n,\nboth appellations of hostile brothers of the Night-Sky. But before we\nbegin this, I will mention another contest of Jacob\u2019s, to which the\noriginal writer devotes only a few lines: \u2018Then Jacob remained behind\nalone; and there wrestled a man with him until the morning rose. And he\nsaw that he could not do anything to him, so he knocked his\nthigh-socket, and Jacob\u2019s thigh-socket was dislocated in wrestling with\nhim. And he said, Let me go, for the morning has risen\u2019 (Gen. XXXII.\n25\u201327 [24\u201326]). Thus Jacob fights with a man who cannot conquer him, but\nwhom he must let off at the rise of the morning. This is the Dawn, who\nwrestles with the end of the night, and in the end breaks loose, so as\nto go up to the sky. The Night is a _limping_ figure (ver. 32 [31]).\nThis again is a feature in the myth of the hero of darkness, which we\nmeet with also in classical mythology, e.g. in Hermes, \u03ba\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd.[393]\nIt probably indicates the opposite to the swiftness and the rapid\nnever-ceasing course of the day, the sun and the dawn.\n\n\n\u00a7 11. Jacob is pursued and made to fight by the _Red_ and by the\n_White_. Both words are designations of the same thing, _i.e._ the Sun.\nIt strikes us as very strange that the myth should call the same object\nnow red, now white. To appreciate this fact, we must think of the\nvarious stages which the sense of colour has to pass through in old\ntimes, until it is fully developed. Even in much later times we come\nacross extraordinary fluctuations of language on Semitic ground in the\ndesignation of colours for solar phenomena. As the demonstration of this\nfact appears important to our present subject and things in connexion\nwith it, the reader will excuse me for pausing longer than usual at this\npoint and taking some excursions from the centre of our investigations.\nThe names of colours were in ancient times very vague; the primitive man\ncould not elevate himself to make any sharply defined distinction and\nclassification of colours. _Red_ and _white_ are therefore here not\nexactly red and white, according to our modern distinction of these\ncolours, but rather _light_ or _bright-coloured_. It is a great merit of\nthe late Lazarus Geiger, too early called home, to have most clearly\nexhibited this phase of the history of the development of ideas and\ntheir expression in language, and illustrated it with the light of\npsychology and comparative philology.[394] His ingenious researches have\nraised to a certainty the theory that the capacity for distinguishing\ncolours has arisen, both in the individual and in the whole race, in the\ncourse of history, through gradual general development; that its\nbeginning follows very late after the beginnings of other intellectual\ncapacities; and that, even after man had grasped the distinction of\ndifferent classes of colour, the _fixing_ of his conceptions of colour\nmade very slow progress, so that he often attributes first one and then\nanother colour to the same object. The shading-off of colours, when once\nunderstood, has yet been fixed in the human mind with such difficulty,\nthat we find in many languages the most helpless wavering in the use of\nnames of colours. As this phenomenon, important in man\u2019s mental\ndevelopment, is no less so in relation to the origin and the\nunderstanding of the elements of myths, we will pause over Geiger\u2019s\ndisquisitions, to consider still further the fluctuating nature of the\ndesignations of colour in language, and especially to notice how far\nfrom clear and unsullied a reflexion impressions of colour cast on\nlanguage, their natural medium of expression. We will however stay in\nthe neighbourhood of the proper subject of investigation, and bring only\nSemitic words under consideration. Let us pick out the designations of\nGold in this field. We cannot say in general terms of the Semitic\nlanguages that in the designation of gold and silver they do not express\nthe optical difference between them, as a scholiast remarks in reference\nto Homer; for the appellations both of gold as _brilliant_,\n_shimmering_, and of silver as _pale_, prove that at least the different\nshine of the two metals was observed at the stage of the formation of\nlanguage.[395] Far less definite, however, than this distinction of the\ntwo according to the general impression made on the sight, is the\ndesignation of the sensation made by each separately. The appellations\nof gold in Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic, z\u00e2h\u00e2bh, dahabh\u00e2, \u1e0fahab, denote\n_brilliant_ in general; whereas the Assyrian and Phenician[396] word for\ngold, \u1e25ura\u1e63u (which is the same as the Hebrew ch\u00e2r\u00fb\u1e63), expresses no\noptical sensation.[397] The former appellations describe an optical\nsensation; but no definite colour-sensation. Indeed, even a late Arabic\npoet says of gold: al-\u1e0fahab al-n\u00e2r\u00ee,[398] \u2018the _fire-like_ gold,\u2019 which,\nif a description of colour, is a very vague one. Ru\u02beb\u00e2 b. al-\u02bfAjj\u00e2j, an\nArabic poet living in the second century of the Hijr\u00e2, says:[399]\n\n Hal yanfa\u02bfun\u00ee ka\u1e0fabun sicht\u00eetu * au fi\u1e0d\u1e0datun au dahabun kibr\u00eetu?\n Will a great lie save me? * or silver, or _sulphur-gold_?\n\nHere gold and sulphur are compared together as similar, at all events in\ncolour, for colour is the only possible _tertium comparationis_ between\nthem; and in fact we also find in Arabic the expression \u2018yellow sulphur,\nas if it were gold\u2019 (kibr\u00eet a\u1e63far ka\u02beannahu \u1e0fahab).[400] I lay\nparticular stress upon this, because a common phrase among the Arabs is,\nal-kibr\u00eet al-a\u1e25mar \u2018red sulphur,\u2019 to denote a peculiar person, one\nwithout his equal, inasmuch as there is no red sulphur. Now gold, of all\nthings, is commonly used both in the later literature and in popular\nspeech with the epithet _red_ (al-\u1e0fahab al-a\u1e25mar). This phrase, as\nOsiander has proved,[401] occurs also in Himyaric, and passed from\nArabic into Persian and Turkish (in Persian zeri surch; in Turkish \u1e33izil\naltyn), and is used especially when minted gold is opposed to silver\ncoins. The former is _red_ money, the latter _white_: e.g. wa-mala\u02betum\nayd\u00eekum min al-\u1e0fahab al-a\u1e25mar wal-fi\u1e0d\u1e0d\u00e2 al-bey\u1e0d\u00e2 \u2018you have filled your\nhands with _red gold_ and _white silver_;\u2019[402] dihhez\u00e2r d\u00een\u00e2r zeri\nsurch, \u2018ten thousand d\u00een\u00e2rs of _red gold_.\u2019[403] In a very noteworthy\nessay, Belin has shown with reference to Turkish that in the Ottoman\nEmpire the metal money is divided into _white_, \u2018a\u1e33,\u2019 and _red_,\n\u2018\u1e33izil\u2019;[404] and in Egypt at the present day the silver piaster is\ncalled abya\u1e0d \u2018white,\u2019 to distinguish it from the copper money _chorde_.\nMu\u02bf\u00e2wiyy\u00e2 said to \u1e62a\u02bf\u1e63a\u02bf\u00e2, \u2018Thou Red one;\u2019 and he answered, \u2018Gold is\nred.\u2019[405] Thus we see that _red_ has become the constant designation of\nthe colour of gold. Now in what harmony does this stand with the\nabove-quoted designation, \u2018sulphur-coloured gold,\u2019 when we consider at\nthe same time the proverbial kibr\u00eet a\u1e25mar \u2018red sulphur\u2019?\n\nEthiopic designates gold, not by a derivative of the root \u2018\u1e0fhb,\u2019 like\nthe other languages of the same stock, but by the word wara\u1e33. We cannot\ndecide _a priori_ whether in its origin this word expresses a\ncolour-sensation or not. In Arabic also we find wara\u1e33 or wari\u1e33 in a\nsimilar signification, and I can scarcely believe that it must be thrown\nout of the original treasury of the Arabic vocabulary. Von Kremer\nclassifies it with the Arabic words borrowed from the Persian stock, and\nrefers it to the Huzw\u00e2resh _warg_.[406] In old time it was equivalent to\n\u2018property, goods.\u2019[407] The poet Su\u1e25eym, an elder contemporary of\nMo\u1e25ammed, says in a little poem, \u2018The poems of the slave of the\nBan\u00fb-l-\u1e24as\u1e25\u00e2s on the day of competition are worth as much as noble birth\nand wara\u1e33 (property);[408] and in some of the traditional sayings of\nMo\u1e25ammed a collateral form of the same word, ri\u1e33\u00e2, denotes 'money.\u2019[409]\nThe Arabic lexicographers give the signification of both forms as\nal-dar\u00e2him al-ma\u1e0dr\u00fbb\u00e2 \u2018stamped coins,\u2019 drachmas. In the more general\nsignification we find wara\u1e33 used by Ab\u00fb Nuw\u00e2s in a poem of youth or\nrather childhood. The poet Ibn Mun\u00e2dir, finding little Ab\u00fb Nuw\u00e2s leaning\nagainst a pillar in the mosque, took a great fancy to him, and addressed\nan erotic poem to him; upon which the boy extemporised the following\nverses, and wrote them on the back of the letter:\n\n You write me a letter of praise without any wara\u1e33 (present);\n That is like a house built on a foundation of reeds;\n But I should think it much pleasanter than your eulogy on me,\n If you would send me a pair of black shoes and a fine dress.\n If you are willing, do get me a wara\u1e33 (present): if you do so\n I shall not turn you away.[410]\n\nWe see clearly from this example how general the meaning of wara\u1e33 is in\nArabic; even a pair of shoes and a dress are included in it. It is,\nhowever, probable that the word, which certainly comes from the south of\nArabia, originally denoted specially _gold_, but being supplanted in\nthis narrow sense by \u1e0fahab in ordinary Arabic, was applied first to\ngold-money, then to money generally (even of silver), and lastly by a\nfurther generalisation to goods and objects of value of all kinds. Its\nSouth-Arabic origin is also confirmed by the fact that it occurs in\nHimyarite,[411] beside \u1e0fahab and kethem; and there is no reason for\nsupposing, with Hal\u00e9vy, that it denotes specially _de l\u2019or en feuilles_,\ncontrasted with _de l\u2019or en poudre_.[412] On the other hand, it must be\nnoticed that the root wara\u1e33 in the Semitic languages designates a\n_colour_, either _green_ or _yellow_, and that it is probably owing to\nthis circumstance that gold is in Ethiopic called wara\u1e33. But this word\nof colour itself is very fluctuating. Whilst in Ethiopic it designates\nthe colour of gold, in Hebrew it gives a name to _grass_ (yere\u1e33), and\nsimilarly in Arabic the green leaves are called wara\u1e33, notwithstanding\nwhich its diminutive urayyi\u1e33[413] (from aura\u1e33) denotes a _dark brown_\ncamel; in ir\u1e33\u00e2n it returns again to the notion _yellow_ or _reddish_.\nThe Hebrew of the Talm\u00fbd and the Targ\u00fbm employs y\u00e2r\u00f4\u1e33 (which in Biblical\nHebrew is mostly used for _green_, but sometimes of a pale face for\n_yellow_, e.g. y\u00ear\u00e2\u1e33\u00f4n \u2018jaundice\u2019) chiefly for a green colour, of\nvegetables and precious stones;[414] nevertheless, we find in the Talm\u00fbd\n(Bab. Ned\u00e2r\u00eem, 32. a) h\u00f4r\u00ee\u1e33\u00e2n bez\u00e2h\u00e2bh \u2018he made it y\u00e2r\u00f4\u1e33 with gold,\u2019\ni.e. made it yellow, gilded it. We have in Ps. LXVIII. 14 [13] yera\u1e33ra\u1e33\nch\u00e2r\u00fb\u1e63, _flavedo auri_. There is a noteworthy passage in Ber\u00eash\u00eeth rabb\u00e2\n(sect. 4 near the end), in which the various colours of the sky are\nmentioned: red, black, white, and also y\u00e2r\u00f4\u1e33.\n\nThe above remarks show how little consistency and distinctness there is\nin the relation of the names derived from colour to the various types of\ncolour. The same result is reached when we inquire, with what\ndesignations of colour other objects are combined. For we find almost\neverywhere the greatest fluctuation, whether we consider the\netymological value of the names themselves, or study the adjectives\nattached to them. In the most favourable cases only the class of\ncolour\u2014light or dark\u2014is observed; but within the class nothing definite\nis found. Arabic especially is a field offering abundant matter for\nobservation and demonstration, on which the excellent labours of Lazarus\nGeiger might be corroborated, completed and extended; but I cannot\nundertake such a task at this place. We will now limit our observations\nto the point which has to be established here: the views of colour which\nwere attached to day and night, the sunny sky and the night-sky, the\ngrey of the morning and the red of the evening.\n\nIn the Vedas, when day and night, sun and darkness, are opposed to each\nother, the one is designated _red_, the other _black_. \u2018The gods have\nmade the night and the dawn of different hue, and given them _black_ and\n_red_ colours\u2019 (Rigveda, I. 73. 7). \u2018The _red_ mother of the _red_ calf\ncomes; the _black_ leaves his place to her\u2019 (Rigveda, I., 113. 2). \u2018The\ndawn comes forward, driving off _black night_\u2019 (Rigveda, I. 92. 5:\ncompare VI. 64. 3).[415] In Hebrew poetry we find no similar case, in\nwhich the opposite colours of the antagonistic forces are thus clearly\nset against one another. Indeed, we do not even find that a separate\ncolour-epithet is given to each. Still it seems certain that at least\nNight was brought into connexion with the colour black;[416] otherwise a\nsentence such as \u2018Darker than Blackness (ch\u00e2shakh mish-shech\u00f4r) is their\nform\u2019 (Lam. IV. 8) would be impossible. We may infer from this that the\nnotions of ch\u00f4shekh \u2018Darkness\u2019 and shech\u00f4r \u2018Blackness\u2019 were closely\nconnected together. This is in Arabic one of the commonest combinations.\nThe dark night is sometimes called al-leyl al-\u1e25\u00e2lik\u2014a word denoting the\ndeepest shade of blackness. To the same class also belongs ad\u02bfaj (in\nleyl ad\u02bfaj \u2018black night\u2019), another adjective denoting _black_.\nChud\u00e2r\u00eeyya is an Arabic word which denotes both _raven_[417] and _night_\n(one cannot help thinking of the Hebrew \u02bferebh \u2018evening\u2019 and \u02bf\u00f4r\u00eabh\n\u2018raven\u2019). The verb ikta\u1e25al is used of Night: \u2018She has coloured herself\nwith the black dye[418] al-ku\u1e25l, e.g. wa-l-\u1e93al\u00e2m i\u1e0fa-kta\u1e25al (Rom. of\n\u02bfAntar, VI. 53. 12). Poetry gives the same evidence as language itself.\nAs in other literatures, so in Arabic, darkness is the term of\ncomparison for everything black. The black hero of the best loved Arabic\npopular romance is pictured as 'black as the colour of darkness, riding\non a horse which resembles the darkness of night\u2019 (aswad kalaun al-\u1e93al\u00e2m\n\u02bfala jaw\u00e2d min al-cheyl ya\u1e25k\u00ee \u1e93al\u00e2m al-leyl: Rom. of \u02bfAntar, IV. 183.\n14). This is the source of a poetic figure much used by Arabic poets in\napplication to a mistress with light features and dark hair. So Bekr b.\nal-Na\u1e6d\u1e6d\u00e2\u1e25 says (\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2, p. 566): \u2018She is as white as if she were herself\nthe brilliant noonday-sky, as if her _black_ hair were the _night_ which\ndarkens it.\u2019 The black hero \u02bfAntar, contrasting his own colour and that\nof his beloved \u02bfAbl\u00e2, compares himself regularly with the night, and her\nwith the dawn (e.g. \u02bfAntar, VII. 136 penult.). She herself once\naddressed him thus, \u2018Go, in the name of God, thou colour of night\u2019 (sir\nf\u00ee \u00e2m\u00e2ni-ll\u00e2hi y\u00e2 laun al-duja, VI. 162. 4), and he often repeats the\nidea that his colour and that of night are the same. Thus (XVIII. 66.\n12):\n\n In akun y\u00e2 \u02bfAblata \u02bfabdan aswad\u00e2 * fasaw\u00e2du-l-leyli min ba\u02bf\u1e0di \u1e63if\u00e2t\u00ee\n Wafach\u00e2r\u00ee annan\u00ee yauma-l-li\u1e33\u00e2\u02bfi * yach\u1e0da\u02bfu-\u1e63-\u1e63ub\u1e25u liseyf\u00ee wa-\u1e33an\u00e2ti.\n\n Though I am, \u02bfAbl\u00e2, a black slave,\n And the blackness of night is one of my qualities,\n Yet it is my boast that on the day of encounter\n The Dawn bows before my bow and spear.\n\nAs a black man is compared to night, so, inversely, the latter is\nlikened to a black gipsy. Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 al-Ma\u02bfarr\u00ee, who is remarkable for\naccurate pictures of nature, says of the sky dazzling with stars, \u2018This\nnight is a Gipsy\u2019s bride, decked out with pearls:\u2019[419]\n\n Leylat\u00ee h\u00e2\u1e0fihi \u02bfar\u00fbsun min az-zan- * ji \u02bfaleyh\u00e2 \u1e33al\u00e2\u02bfidu min\n jum\u00e2ni.[420]\n\nOn another occasion the same poet (II. 106. 4) compares the night to\nblack _ink_:\n\n Katabn\u00e2 wa-a\u02bfrabn\u00e2 bi-\u1e25ibrin min ad-duja * su\u1e6d\u00fbra-s-sura f\u00ee \u1e93ahri\n bey\u1e0d\u00e2\u02bea bal\u1e33a\u02bfi.\n\nAnd one of the most ordinary descriptions of _darkening_ is that \u2018Night\nput on her _black_ adornments.\u2019[421] From all this it is seen that it is\nperfectly usual and matter-of-course to associate Night with the colour\n_Black_.[422] Indeed, by the Black the poet understands _par excellence_\nNight. Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 al-Ma\u02bfarr\u00ee, the poet so frequently quoted in this\nsection, says at one place (_ibid._ I. 131.2): \u2018The _Black_ one, whose\nfather is unknown to men, has shrouded me in clothes from himself (i.e.\nin black or dark ones).\u2019 Nevertheless, we can convince ourselves here\ntoo, that even this point of the conception of colour is not devoid of\nfluctuation. For the blackness of night is not nearly so distinct a\nconception as ours when we speak of a black night. On the contrary, it\nis not yet separated from the general category of _dark colour_, to\nwhich green and blue also belong. When the land of the Ban\u00fb Madhij was\nvisited with drought, the tribe sent out three explorers (ruww\u00e2d, from\nthe singular r\u00e2\u02beid), to look for suitable pasturage. One of them says in\nhis report in praise of the splendid green meadows of the land he\nrecommends, that the surface of the land is _like night_, so green is\nit.[423] Al-Afwah, a Preislamite Arabic poet and sage,[424] in a verse\nquoted by the lexicographer al-Jauhar\u00ee (under the root _sds_),\nassociates Night with the colour of _sud\u00fbs_. So also Ab\u00fb Nucheyl\u00e2,[425]\na later poet who lived under the Abbasid dynasty as their laureate, says\n\u2018Put on as thy shirt Night, black and dark like the colour of _sundus_\u2019:\n\n Waddari\u02bf\u00ee jilb\u00e2ba leylin da\u1e25masi * aswada d\u00e2jin mithli\n launi-s-sundusi.[426]\n\nAnother anonymous poet, or rather verse-monger, says in the same sense\n\u2018Among the nights a dark night, when the sky is like the colour of\n_sundus_\u2019:\n\n Waleylatin min-al-lay\u00e2l\u00ee \u1e25indisi * launu \u1e25aw\u00e2sh\u00eeh\u00e2\n kalaimi-s-sundusi.[427]\n\nBut sud\u00fbs and sundus denote a garment the colour of which is regularly\nmentioned as ach\u1e0dar \u2018greenish.\u2019 So, e.g., twice in the \u1e32or\u00e2n (S\u00fbr.\nXVIII. 30, LXXVI. 21), where the joys and delights of Paradise are\ndescribed, _green sundus garments_ are promised to the faithful; and\nsimilarly in a tradition mentioned by al-\u0120az\u00e2li[428] we find it said of\nmen who become brethren in God, \u2018Their beauty shines like the sun, and\nthey are clothed in _green sundus garments_\u2019 (wa-\u02bfaleyhim thi\u00e2b sundus\nchu\u1e0dr).\n\nBut this uncertainty of the colour which is associated with the Night is\nfar less prominent than the fluctuation which prevails when the colour\nof the Day has to be described. In the former case, with a few\nexceptions based on the impression which a certain peculiar night may\nhave made on the mind of the speaker or poet, black is by far the\nprevailing colour. Not so with the colour-distinctions of the solar\nphenomena. Here usage wavers among three colours, which are usually\nconnected with the various stages of the Sun himself: _golden-yellow_,\n_red_, and _white_. The greatest definiteness is found to exist with\nreference to the first. It refers mostly to the dawn and sunset. In\nAramaic the early morning is \u1e63afr\u00e2. Etymologically this word is capable\nof many explanations which justify the above-expounded mythical\nconceptions of the dawn. It may be explained, as the soundest\nlexicographers on Semitic ground do explain it,[429] to denote _curled\nlocks of hair_, or _one who springs, leaps_. Both explanations take us\nback to mythic attributes of the morning-sun; in the second we see the\nmorning-sun springing up to heaven from behind the hills like a bird\n(\u1e63ipp\u00f4r). But I believe that the word \u1e63afr\u00e2 is related to a\u1e63far, a\ncolour-name in Arabic, which, though like all such it has an extremely\nvague signification, and may even mean _nigredo_, prevailingly indicates\na golden-yellow colour. Now while the Aramaic \u1e63afr\u00e2 is exclusively the\nmorning-sun (compare \u1f2a\u1f7c\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, Iliad, VIII. 1, and \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 of\nthe night), in Arabic the colour-word in question is prevailingly\napplied to the evening-sun: \u2018Until upon him came the end of the day, and\nthe Sun put on the garment of yellowness\u2019 (ila an at\u00e2 \u02bfaleyhi \u00e2chir\nal-nah\u00e2r wa-labisat al-shams \u1e25ullat al-i\u1e63fir\u00e2r, Rom. of \u02bfAntar, VI. 244.\n1). Another example, in which the succession of time comes out with\nstill greater clearness, is: \u2018They had defeated al-No\u02bfm\u00e2n at noon; then\nthey took rest till the Sun put on the garment of yellowness, and\ntowards evening dust appeared before them\u2019 (wa-k\u00e2n\u00fb \u1e33ad saba\u1e33\u00fb al-No\u02bfm\u00e2n\nbi-ni\u1e63f al-nah\u00e2r wa-acha\u1e0f\u00fb r\u00e2\u1e25\u00e2 \u1e25atta labisat al-shams \u1e25ullat al-i\u1e63fir\u00e2r\nwa-\u02bfind al-mas\u00e2 \u1e6dala\u02bf \u02bfaleyhim \u0121ob\u00e2r, Rom. of \u02bfAntar, VI. 35. 2). It is\nremarkable that in Egyptian the setting sun is said to throw out rays of\n_tahen_\u2014a metal distinguished for its saffron colour, which is\nfrequently contrasted with the colour red.[430] Chabas finds this\ncontrast to constitute a difficulty in the comparison with the setting\nsun. Semitic analogies, however, show that the association of saffron\ncolour with the sun, especially the evening-sun, is not confined to\nEgyptian. No case on Arabic ground is as yet known to me in which this\nyellowish colour, al-i\u1e63fir\u00e2r, is attributed to any other stage of the\nsun\u2019s course except the evening. But there is the word a\u1e63ba\u1e25 (from \u1e63ub\u1e25\n\u2018the early morning\u2019) \u2018morning-coloured,\u2019 used of the lion, which is said\nto denote a colour near to a\u1e63far.[431] At all events, the Aramaic \u1e63afr\u00e2\nand the Arabic usage teach us that a yellow colour is in Semitic an\nattribute of both the morning- and the evening-sun. It is very different\nwith the two other colours, white and red. There we meet with greater\nfluctuations. Sometimes the morning-sun is described as white, in\ncomparison with the sun of the advanced day; sometimes the former is\nbright red and the latter white:\n\n Ka\u02beanna sana-l-fajreyni lamm\u00e2 taw\u00e2lay\u00e2 * damu\u02bel-achaweyni za\u02bffar\u00e2ni\n wa-ayda\u02bf\u00ee.\n Af\u00e2\u1e0da \u02bfala t\u00e2l\u00eehima-\u1e63-\u1e63ub\u1e25u m\u00e2\u02beahu * fa\u0121ayyara min ishr\u00e2\u1e33i a\u1e25mara\n mushba\u02bfi.\n\n As if the light of the two daybreaks when they follow one after the\n other\n Were the blood of the two brothers saffron and red.\n The dawn poured its waters over the latter,\n And changed into white its deep red.[432]\n\nAt its very first appearance the morning-dawn is of saffron colour, then\na bright red comes, and the further the day advances, the whiter it\nbecomes. The two daybreaks (al-fajr\u00e2n), as the scholiast observes on\nthis passage, are al-k\u00e2\u1e0fib wa-l-\u1e63\u00e2di\u1e33\u2014the _lying_ or supposed one, which\nprecedes the true dawn, and the latter itself. The very poet, however,\nfrom whom I quote this fragment, at another place exactly inverts the\norder of colour: representing the white or grey colour as appearing\nfirst, and then passing into the reddish or saffron. In a poem to a\nfriend, in which he gives a beautiful description of night, he brings\nforward Night as in love with the stars. But she grows old\u2014\n\n Thumma sh\u00e2ba-d-duja wa-ch\u00e2fa min al-haj- * ri fa\u0121a\u1e6d\u1e6da-l-mash\u00eeba\n bi-z-za\u02bffar\u00e2ni.\n\n And Night grew grey, and feared the desertion [of her lover, the starry\n heaven]:\n So she dipped her grey hair into saffron.[433]\n\nThe idea that the poet intends to express here is, that Night at its\nlatter end becomes grey, when the grey morning begins to appear, and\nthat to preserve the appearance of youth and be still acceptable to her\nlover she must put on red paint. But even the brightness of the sun by\nday (\u1e0di\u00e2 al-nah\u00e2r) is compared by the same poet to the grey hairs of an\nold man (II. 226. 2), as is also the brightness of the stars:[434]\n\n Ra\u02be\u00e2h\u00e2 sal\u00eelu \u1e6d-\u1e6d\u00eeni wa-sh-sheybu sh\u00e2milun * lah\u00e2 bith-thureyy\u00e2\n w\u00e2-s-sim\u00e2keyni wa-l-wazni.[435]\n\n He that was brought out of clay [Adam] saw it [the world], when its hair\n was all grey,\n With the Pleiades, the two Fishes and the Balance.\n\nWe find the same figure, of which we have seen Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 to be so fond,\nused by Ab\u00fb-l-\u1e24asan \u02bfAl\u00ee b. Is\u1e25\u00e2\u1e33 al-Wadd\u00e2n\u00ee, a Ma\u0121reb [North African]\npoet, who says of the morning: \u2018It is like the greyness which spreads\nitself over the black hair of youth (the black night):\u2019\n\n D\u00e2na-\u1e63-\u1e63ab\u00e2\u1e25u wa-l\u00e2 ata wa-ka\u02beannahu * sheybun a\u1e6dalla \u02bfala saw\u00e2di\n shib\u00e2b\u00ee.[436]\n\nSo, inversely, when the hair grows grey it is said \u2018The dark night is\nlighted.\u2019[437]\n\nFrom all these cases it may be gathered that the progress of the sun\nfrom the dawn to the full day is treated sometimes as a transition from\na whitish to a reddish colour, sometimes as the reverse. Sometimes the\nredness of morning begins, and turns into white; sometimes the greyness,\nwhich passes into red.[438] But both conceptions are also found combined\nin a single idea: thus, for instance, al-\u02bfArj\u00ee the poet says:\n\n B\u00e2t\u00e2 bi-an\u02bf\u00e2mi leylatin \u1e25atta bad\u00e2 * sub\u1e25un talawwa\u1e25a\n ka-l-a\u0121arri-l-ashkari.\n They both passed a joyous night, until began\n The morning to appear, like a red horse with white forehead-spot\n (\u0121urr\u00e2).[439]\n\nSome already-cited examples have enabled us to observe that when day is\ncontrasted with night, it is done by calling the night black and the day\nwhite. To the former instances I will now add another for clearness\u2019\nsake: \u2018Till the whiteness of the day became black\u2019 (\u1e25atta \u02bf\u00e2da bay\u00e2\u1e0d\nal-nah\u00e2r saw\u00e2dan, Rom. of \u02bfAntar, XXV. 5. 4). The attribute _white_,\napplied to the sun of the advanced day, is especially clear in a passage\nwhich I must not omit to mention. The poet al-Mutanabb\u00ee says:\n\n Az\u00fbruhum wa-saw\u00e2du-l-leyli yashfa\u02bfun\u00ee * wa-anthan\u00ee wa-bay\u00e2\u1e0du-\u1e63-\u1e63ub\u1e25i\n yu\u0121r\u00ee b\u00ee.\n I visit them when the _blackness of the night_ aids me;\n And I retire when the _whiteness of the morning_ drives me away.\n\nA critic[440] remarks on this passage that the writer ought to have\nspoken of the _day_ rather than of the _whiteness of the morning_, as\nthe rhetorical law of al-mu\u1e33\u00e2bal\u00e2 \u2018antithesis\u2019 demands as the opposite\nto Night not Dawn, but Day. Thus \u2018the whiteness of day\u2019 would be better.\nAnother passage with the antithesis is contained in \u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee: \u2018The white\nday becomes black\u2019 (iswadda-l-yaum al-abya\u1e0d).[441] This use of language\nis characteristically exemplified in the expression sirn\u00e2 bay\u00e2\u1e0da jaumin\u00e2\nwa-saw\u00e2da leylatin\u00e2, \u2018we travelled night and day\u2019 (literally, \u2018we\ntravelled during the whiteness of our day and the blackness of our\nnight,\u2019 A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee, II. 74. 20). But apart from any antithesis, the white\ncolour is attributed to the light of the morning and the day:\nfalamma-rtafa\u02bfat al-shams faby\u00e2\u1e0d\u1e0dat, \u2018after the sun had risen high and\n_become white_,\u2019 is said in a tradition.[442] In the Romance of \u02bfAntar\n(XXIV. 111. 3), a horse is thus described: \u2018he was white in colour, as\nif he were the day when it breaks, or the moon[443] when it shines with\nfull beams\u2019 (wa-hua abya\u1e0d al-laun ka\u02beannahu al-\u1e63ab\u00e2\u1e25 i\u1e0fa-nfajar\nwa-l-\u1e33amar i\u1e0f\u00e2 badar).\n\nOn Assyrian ground also we discover the idea of the _whiteness_ of the\nsun, expressed, not indeed by a word directly signifying a colour, but\nyet by an epithet which is undoubtedly founded upon this idea. In the\nlyrical poem, called by Schrader \u2018The Assyrian Royal Psalm\u2019 (line 29), a\nland with a _silver sky_,[444] i.e. with a bright shining sunny sky, is\ndesired for the king. So here the bright sunny sky is represented as of\nsilver colour. On the other hand, \u1e24omar^m, the name of a Himyarite\ngod,[445] has perhaps a solar meaning, equivalent to the Arabic a\u1e25mar\n\u2018Red;\u2019 at all events, the fancy that he may be a sort of Bacchus (chamr\n\u2018wine\u2019) sounds improbable. In Hebrew literature we find no direct\nindications of the colours which were associated with the sun: an\nindirect indication is afforded by the passage in Is. XXIV. 23, where it\nis said that \u2018the sun grows pale and the moon red.\u2019[446] In the Talm\u00fbd\nliterature, however, we find an incidental discussion of the colour of\nthe sun; to which one of the Excursus is devoted.[447]\n\nI have paused long on the ideas held of the Sun with reference to\ncolour, longer than is consistent with the symmetry of my book, and have\nespecially brought up many examples from the Arabic language, celebrated\nfor its wealth of synonyms and epithets\u2014all with the object of giving\nprobability to my ideas on the mythical character of Esau or Edom and\nLaban, Jacob\u2019s two hostile kinsmen. We have seen that the sun is called\n_white_ quite as frequently as _red_;[448] now is it not certain beyond\na doubt that the two foes of Jacob the Night-sky, namely Edom the red\nand Laban the white, are only names for the Sun, formed by the Hebrew\nmyth on the ground of the sun\u2019s colour? The war of darkness and the\nstormy sky against the red or white sunny sky is described in the rich\nlanguage of Mythology, which has devoted such multifarious appellations\nto this struggle, as a strife of one who follows on the heel of his\nbrother, against the white and the red. Here we will return to a point\nwhich was anticipated in the Third Section of this chapter; I mean the\nfact that the mythic feature which, with other solar characteristics,\nhas fastened itself on the description of David, a perfectly historical\nperson, that he was adm\u00f4n\u00ee \u2018reddish,\u2019 belongs to the same group of\nmythic ideas. It is a bit of solar myth: \u2018He is red, and of excellent\nsight and good eyes\u2019 (1 Sam. XVI. 12).\n\nThus the mythical appellations Jacob, Edom, and Laban appear to be\ncleared up, and the features belonging to them have discovered to us the\nnocturnal character of the first-named and the solar of the two latter\npersonages. I have confined myself to the most essential point, the\nstatement of the fact and the identification of the mythic figures in\nthe centre of the story. If we were to use the collateral points also as\nmythic matter, more abundant results might be attained. But we must\nlimit ourselves to an investigation of the main features, since in the\npresent position of mythological inquiry it would be difficult and\ndangerous to try to pick out with any confidence from the epic\ndescriptions in the Bible all that belongs to the original myth. It\nmight, for instance, be urged that Jacob is endowed with a _deceitful_\ncharacter, since he cheats the one of his blessing and his birthright,\nand the other of his sheep (Hermes), and this might be treated as\ncharacteristic of the _night_, as the figures of the night-sky are\ncredited elsewhere with a thievish nature. \u2018Like thieves,\u2019 said the\nancient Indian singer, \u2018so the nights stole away with their stars, that\nS\u00fbrya might become visible\u2019 (Rigveda, I. 50. 2).\n\nIn a legend of the Palatinate the _King of the Night_ residing at the\nIce-sea _stole_ the Sun;[449] Rachel steals the household-gods of her\nfather Laban (Gen. XXXI. 19); and Jacob himself, as the Scripture\nexpresses it, _steals_ the heart of Laban the Aramean, not telling him\nof his intention to fly (v. 20).\n\n Now wrapt in mantle, like a thief, the Night is seen,\n She covers o'er her silver-studded raiment\u2019s sheen.\n\nsays Arany, in his \u2018Gipsies of Nagy-Ida\u2019[450] (Canto I. v. 21).\n\nBut what I have hitherto explained is only one side of Jacob\u2019s mythical\ncharacteristics: we have seen against whom he fought. But Jacob did not\nonly fight: he loved also, loved with tenderness and self-abnegation. He\nwooed, he married; and the history of his children takes up a\nconsiderable portion of the Book of Genesis. The loves of the Night-sky,\nthe names of his wives whom he gained by conquest, and of the children\nthat came out of his loins, must be an important part of the Myth of the\nNight-sky; and we should be accomplishing our task very imperfectly if\nwe refused to enter on the consideration of these figures of Hebrew\nmythology.\n\n\n\u00a7 12. Let us turn first to his women. He has both wives and so-called\nconcubines. In my opinion this distinction belongs to the original\nform of the myth; and some explanation of its significancy must be\ngiven at the outset. There is another already-discussed name of the\nnight-sky, Abhr\u00e2m, with which are associated both a legitimate wife\nS\u00e2r\u00e2, and a concubine H\u00e2g\u00e2r; and in the latter we discovered the\nmythical bearer of a solar name, \u2018the Flying one.\u2019 This circumstance\nleads to the discovery that, whilst the concubines in mythical\nphraseology are figures of _opposite_ nature to their master, like\nHagar a solar figure to Abram the dark sky, the names of the\nlegitimate wives represent figures homogeneous to the nature of the\nhusband. This is the case preeminently with Sarah, Abram\u2019s wife. The\nname signifies _Princess, Lady_, the Princess of the Heaven, the Moon,\nthe Queen who rules over the great army of the night-sky (\u1e63ebh\u00e2\nhash-sh\u00e2may\u00eem). Another name of the moon in Hebrew mythology is\nprobably Milk\u00e2 (the wife of Abraham\u2019s brother Nahor, Gen. XI. 29),\ni.e. \u2018the Queen\u2019\u2014not expressly _wife_, but grammatically the feminine\nform of Melekh (Abh\u00ee-melekh) \u2018King\u2019 (the Sun), like Ash\u00ear\u00e2 (Moon) from\n\u00c2sh\u00ear (Sun), or Lebh\u00e2n\u00e2 (Moon) from L\u00e2bh\u00e2n (Sun). \u2018Queen or Princess\nof Heaven\u2019 is a very frequent name for the Moon.[451] We learn most\nremarkable facts from the Chaldee-Babylonian series of deities, which,\nthough not old enough to be a myth, must, like every theogony, have\nsprung from mythology misunderstood. In this system, in which the\ndeities are arranged in male and female triads, so that there is\nalways a male deity parallel to the goddess of the female triad who\nstands at the same spot, S\u00een (the Moon) and Gula of the male triad are\nbalanced respectively by \u2018the highest Princess\u2019 and by Malk\u00eet \u2018the\nQueen\u2019 in the female; and these are only Sarah and Milcah again. Istar\nalso is described as Princess (sarrat) of heaven;[452] which is\nprobably connected with the fact that this goddess of the Assyrian\nPantheon, who is commonly compared to Venus, in later times became a\nmoon-goddess.[453] Sir H. Rawlinson says that \u039c\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ae in Damascius may\nbe cognate with the Assyrian Sheruha or Sheruya, the wife of Assh\u00fbr,\nand signify \u2018the Queen.\u2019[454] And as it is the _stars_ over which the\nQueen of the night-sky bears sway, she is _siderum regina_ in Horace\n(_Carmen saeculare_, v. 35).[455] Even in the latest times the Hebrews\ncalled the moon the \u2018Queen of Heaven\u2019 (mele-kheth hash-sh\u00e2may\u00eem, Jer.\nVII. 18), and paid her divine honours in this character at the time of\nthe Captivity. The Hebrew women who had migrated to Egypt answered the\nProphet who warned them: \u2018As to the word that thou has spoken unto us\nin the name of Jahveh, we do not listen to thee; for we shall\ncertainly do all the things that have gone forth from our own mouth;\nburning incense to the _Queen of Heaven_, and pouring libations to her\nas we have done, we and our fathers, our kings and princes, in the\ncities of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem, and were filled with\nfood and were happy and saw no evil; whereas ever since we have ceased\nto burn incense to the _Queen of Heaven_ and pour libations to her, we\nhave wanted everything, and been consumed by sword and famine. And\nwhen we were burning incense to the Queen of Heaven and pouring\nlibations to her, was it _without our men_ that we made cakes for her,\nto receive her image, and poured libations to her?\u2019 (Jer. XLIV.\n16\u201319). This reply leads us to infer that the moon-worship in Judah\nwas specially attractive to the women and allowed by the men, and was\nnot a mere secondary religious act, but a prominent worship of the\nfirst rank; yet a worship which, considering the prevailingly solar\ncharacter of the religion of an agricultural people, was then kept up\nchiefly by the women as the relic of an ancient nomadic age. What was\nthe antiquity of this lunar worship among the Hebrews, is testified\n(as has long been known) by the part played by Mount Sinai in the\nhistory of Hebrew religion. For this geographical name is doubtless\nrelated to _Sin_, one of the Semitic names of the moon. The mountain\nmust in ancient times have been consecrated to the Moon.[456] The\nbeginning of the Hebrew religion, which, as we shall see, was\nconnected with the phenomena of the night-sky, germinated first during\nthe residence in Egypt on the foundation of an ancient myth. The\nrecollection of this occasioned them to call the part of Egypt which\nthey had long inhabited ere\u1e63 S\u00een\u00eem \u2018Moonland\u2019 (Is. XLIX. 12).\nObviously the lunar worship of Nomads stands in connexion with the\nprominent position occupied by the figures of the night-sky in their\nmythology. When, through that psychological process which results in\nthe decay of the life of the myth and the rise of a religious view of\nthe world, the mythic elements become religion, then the Moon is not\nbelieved to possess those deleterious qualities of which the later\nlegends of the American nations are full, but is rather regarded as\nthe source of blessing and success. The Hebrews called the most\nfruitful place in their new country, the \u2018City of the Palms,\u2019 formerly\ndelightful, though now a very cheerless hole, by a name denoting\n_Moon-city_\u2014Yer\u00each\u00f4 (Jericho). An analogous system of nomenclature is\nmentioned by \u1e24amz\u00e2 of I\u1e63pah\u00e2n, a Persian who wrote in Arabic, who says\nin his _Kit\u00e2b al-muw\u00e2zan\u00e2_ that, because the moon is the cause of an\nabundant supply of water and of rain, the names of the most fruitful\nplaces in Persia are compounded with the word _m\u00e2h_ \u2018moon:\u2019 e.g.\nM\u00e2hid\u00een\u00e2r, M\u00e2hisherery\u00e2r\u00e2n, M\u00e2hik\u00e2r\u00e2n, M\u00e2hihar\u00fbm &c.[457] For, in the\nopinion of the Iranians the growth of plants depends on the influence\nof the moon.[458] The Arabic language still shows clearly the mythical\nconnexion between the moon and good pasture,[459] in the fact that the\nsame word, which as a noun, al-\u1e33amar, signifies moon, as a verb,\n\u1e33amara, expresses the notion _multus fuit_ (de aqua et pabulo), and\n\u1e33amir means _multa_ aqua.\n\nThe nomadic Hebrews called Sarah, the Princess of Heaven,[460] i.e. of\nthe night-sky, Abram\u2019s legitimate wife. The same relation between wife\nand concubine comes out with still greater distinctness in the case of\nJacob, Abram\u2019s synonym. His legitimate wives are Leah and Rachel; to the\nlatter he is bound by the tenderest love\u2014a love which in the view of the\nBiblical writer became the ideal of self-sacrificing conjugal affection.\nBoth their names are homogeneous to Jacob\u2019s mythical character, and the\nbearers of these mythical appellations are figures of the dark sky of\nnight and clouds. It will be regarded by serious investigators as no\nmere chance that the word L\u00ea\u02be\u00e2 in its origin signifies the same as\nDel\u00eel\u00e2, namely, _languida, defatigata_, the _Languishing, Weary,\nWeak_\u2014the setting Sun that has finished its day\u2019s work, or rather the\ntime when there is no longer any sun, but the Night, who cuts off from\nher long-haired lover or bridegroom the locks (_crines Phoebi_) in which\nhis whole force resides; the Night, which robs the Sun of his splendid\nrays, and causes him to fall powerless to the ground and lie blind on\nthe battle-field. Even in a product of the Jewish literature of a later\nage the expression ch\u00e2l\u00e2sh \u2018weak, debilitated\u2019 is used of the setting\nsun. \u2018He is like a hero who goes forth strong and returns home\npowerless; thus the sun at his rising is a mighty hero, and at his\nsetting a _weakling_.\u2019[461] Nothing similar is connected with the name\nL\u00ea\u02be\u00e2; yet it is clear that this name is an appellation of the setting\nsun or the advancing night, when we read: we\u02bf\u00ean\u00ea L\u00ea\u02be\u00e2 rakk\u00f4th \u2018the eyes\nof Leah were weak\u2019 (Gen. XXIX. 17).[462] How closely the ideas \u2018End\u2019\n(here that of the day) and \u2018Weariness\u2019 hang together in Semitic, we see\nclearly in the Aramaic word shilh\u00e2, shilh\u00ea \u2018end,\u2019 which is developed out\nof the Shaph\u02bf\u00eal form of the root leh\u00ee (the Hebrew l\u00e2\u02be\u00e2, whence the name\nL\u00ea\u02be\u00e2), which denotes \u2018to be wearied.\u2019[463] The name R\u00e2ch\u00eal is still\nclearer and less ambiguous. It signifies \u2018Sheep.\u2019 When the ancients\nraised their eyes to heaven and saw grey clouds slowly driving over the\ncelestial fields, they discovered there the same as our children see\nwhen in their innocent imaginations they find figures of hills and\nanimals in the sky. Men who form myths stand in this respect on the same\nintellectual stage as our children. How finely has Angelo de Gubernatis,\nin the introduction to his most original work \u2018Zoological Mythology,\u2019\nattached his profound explanations of the old animal-mythology, which\nare based upon a sympathetic poetical feeling after the sentiments of a\nmythic age, to vivid memories of that early age in which the enquirer\nafter myths himself looked up to heaven and _made_ myths! Moreover, what\nthe primitive humanity that created myths and the children of our\nadvanced modern age read in the picture-book of nature,[464] is still\nfound there by people who, although they no longer make myths, yet excel\nus in immediate observation of nature. The sandhills and downs of the\nSahara are variously called by the natives kelb \u2018Dog,\u2019 kebsh \u2018Ram,\u2019 or\nchashm el-kelb or chashm el-kebsh \u2018Dog\u2019s nose\u2019 or \u2018Ram\u2019s nose.\u2019[465] But\nit is chiefly the clouds that gave so much food to fancy. On Arabic\nground we can refer to a treatise by Ab\u00fb Bekr ibn Dureyd, a linguist of\nan early age known to every Arabist, on the \u2018Description of the Rain and\nthe Cloud,\u2019 which the learned Professor William Wright has published in\na useful collection. In this treatise many a vivid picture is to be\nfound which exhibits the continual working of the old mythic views.[466]\nEven a modern literature nearer to us may be quoted; for who knows not\nthe classical passage in Shakespeare, where Polonius makes observations\non the forms of the clouds\u2014a series of mythical observations, which the\nsame poet allows another of his heroes to condense into a mythological\n_r\u00e9sum\u00e9_:\n\n Sometime we see a cloud that\u2019s dragonish;\n A vapour sometime like a bear or lion,\n A tower'd citadel, a pendent rock,\n A forked mountain, or blue promontory\n With trees upon \u2019t, that nod unto the world,\n And mock our eyes with air.\n _Antony and Cleopatra_, IV. 14.\n\nIf the sky is a pasture, it is most natural to see in the clouds beasts\nfeeding there. So the nomad Arab sees in the clouds herds of\ncamels,[467] and calls a small herd of twenty or thirty camels by the\nsame name by which he describes a broken-off fragment of cloud\u2014al-\u1e63irm\u00e2.\nThe poet Ab\u00fb \u1e24ib\u00e2l calls a rain-cloud dal\u00fb\u1e25, i.e. \u2018a heavily laden\ncamel;\u2019[468] and according to the Arabian philologist al-Tebr\u00eez\u00ee a cloud\naccompanied by thunder and lightning is called al-\u1e25ann\u00e2n\u00e2 \u2018the\nbellowing,\u2019 because the ancient Arabs compared a thundering cloud[469]\nto a camel that breaks out into loud bellowing from painful desire to\nreach home.[470] How full of meaning is the myth that lies hidden behind\nthis expression \u1e25ann\u00e2n\u00e2! The camel on a journey has gone far away from\nhome, longs to be back again, and bellows with terrible pain: it is the\nThunder.[471] And this myth was not confined to the Arabs; we find a\nslight trace of it among the later Jews, in the Talm\u00fbd. When it\nthundered, they said, \u2018The clouds groan.\u2019 Ach\u00e2 b. Ja\u02bfa\u1e33\u00f4bh describes\nmeteorological phenomena in the following words: \u2018The lightning\nsparkles, _the clouds groan_ (menaham\u00een \u02bfan\u00e2n\u00ea), and the rain comes\u2019\n(Ber\u00e2kh\u00f4th, fol. 59. a). This mythical conception is only a variation of\nthe more general view that thunder is a _lion\u2019s roaring_ (Job XXXVII. 4;\nsh\u00e2\u02beag is used specially of the lion), out of which grew the roaring of\nJahveh, mentioned in many passages of prophecy and poetry\u2014a result of\nthe monotheistic transformation of mythical ideas. In Arabic hamhama is\nused both of the lion\u2019s roaring and of thunder; and so also zamjara. In\nthe work of Ibn Dureyd already quoted an Arab says of a thunder-cloud,\n\u2018Its thunders groan like camels longing to get home (\u1e6dir\u00e2b), and roar\nlike raging lions.\u2019[472]\n\nThe Arab saw in the clouds a herd of camels, in a single cloud a single\ncamel.[473] The ostrich, which is a favourite term of comparison in\nArabic poetry, is also seen by them in the clouds. Zuheyr b. \u02bfUrw\u00e2 says\nof a little cloud visible behind a larger one, that it was an ostrich\nhung up by the feet (ka\u02beanna-r-rab\u00e2ba duweyna-s-sa\u1e25\u00e2bi * na\u02bf\u00e2mun\ntu\u02bfalla\u1e33u bi-l-arjuli).[474] From the Hebrew mythology we have the\nsimilar conception of the cloud as a _sheep_, as R\u00e2ch\u00eal. She is the\nlegitimate wife of the dark, nocturnal or overclouded sky. When the\ncloud let fall its wet burden in drizzling rain upon the earth, the\nprimitive Hebrews said \u2018Rachel is weeping for her children\u2019\u2014a phrase\npreserved from an age of mythic ideas, which was retained to a late age\nin a very different sense.[475] For as the Arab regarded the thunder as\nthe cloud\u2019s cry of pain, so the Hebrew could see in the rain Rachel\u2019s\ntears. Even up to the present day the Arabs say of the rain: \u2018The sky\nweeps, the clouds weep;\u2019[476] and the idea was not strange to the Greek,\nwho spoke of the \u2018Tears of Zeus.\u2019[477] In the Romance of \u02bfAntar, XXV.\n58. 4, it is said of the rain:\n\n The gloomy heaven weeps with tears, that stream in constant flow\n Out from the eye of a rainful cloud.\n\nThe poet Ibn Mu\u1e6deyr says most beautifully of the weeping sky: \u2018The cloud\nsmiles at the lighting up (of the lightning), and weeps from the corners\nof her eyes, the moisture of which is not excited by splinters (sticking\nin the eye); and without either joy or grief she combines laughing and\nweeping.\u2019[478] Rachel has a favourite son called Y\u00f4s\u00eaph (Joseph). This\nname signifies: \u2018He multiplies,\u2019 or, from the explanation already given,\n\u2018The Multiplier.\u2019 He is called in a hymn addressed to him, \u2018The blessing\nof the heaven above, the blessing of the flood that lies below, the\nblessing of the (female) breasts and of the womb\u2019 (Gen. XLIX. 25). Can\nwe doubt that this is the Rain, which multiplies\u2014the blessing from\nabove, which lies below in floods of water, the rain which\nmythologically was so often regarded as the nutritive milk of the milked\ncows of the clouds?[479] And probably the old Arabic idol called\nZ\u00e2\u02beidatu,[480] i.e. \u2018the Multiplieress,\u2019 has the same mythological\nsignification as the synonymous term Joseph in Hebrew, and may therefore\nbe regarded as a goddess of Rain. Can the least doubt be felt, that \u2018the\nMultiplier,\u2019 the son of the cloud, must be the rain, as wine is called\nthe daughter of the grape,[481] and the fruit the son of the tree,[482]\nand as bread is called in Arabic j\u00e2biru-bnu \u1e25abbata, like \u2018Strengthener,\nson of Mrs. Grain?\u2019[483] Moreover, while these latter views are natural,\nbut not spread abroad everywhere, the idea that the rain is the child of\nthe cloud is universal. We meet it among the Greeks, for Pindar sings:\n\n ... \u1f15\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03b4\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n \u1f40\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, _\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u039d\u03b5\u03c6\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2_ (Olymp. XI. 2, 3),\u2014\n\njust like the Arabs. The poet Mo\u1e25ammed b. \u02bfAbd al-Malik said, when a\nviolent shower of rain delayed the arrival of his friend al-\u1e24asan b.\nWahab, \u2018I know not how to express my complaint against one heaven which\nkeeps back from me another heaven (the friend), unless indeed I utter\ncurse and blessing together: Let _the former become childless_, and the\nlatter live long.\u2019[484] The cloudy heaven was to lose his children\u2014i.e.\nthe rain was to cease.\n\n Lastu adr\u00ee m\u00e2 \u1e0f\u00e2 a\u1e33\u00fblu wa-ashk\u00fb * min sam\u00e2\u02bein ta\u02bf\u00fb\u1e33un\u00ee \u02bfan sam\u00e2\u02be\u00ef\n \u0120ayra ann\u00ee ad\u02bf\u00fb \u02bfala tilka bi-th-thuk- * l\u00ee wa-ad\u02bf\u00fb lih\u00e2\u1e0fihi\n bi-l-ba\u1e33\u00e2\u02bei.\n\nIt is this \u2018Multiplier, Son of the Cloud,\u2019 alone who can bring aid when\nthe earth is visited by long drought and famine. The _multiplying_ Rain\ngives back to the parched earth her fertility and procures nourishment\nfor starving mankind. This simple idea is formed from the mythic base\ninto the story of the famine in Egypt and Joseph\u2019s aid in allaying it.\nThe myth itself, while it lived, was general, not bound by time or\nplace, limited neither geographically or chronologically. When no longer\nunderstood and when lost to human consciousness, it became a locally\ndefined legend, belonging to a certain historical period. This is the\nsame experience which meets us in most of the myths of Hellenic Heroes.\nThe Sun, which daily assails with an iron club and slays the monsters of\ndarkness and the storms, when personified as Herakles does his deeds in\na small place in Hellas, Nemea or Lerna. While Joseph imparts fertility\nto the parched earth, and in his character of \u2018Multiplier\u2019 delivers it\nfrom the curse which rested on it, the prophetic hero, in whom we have\nalready detected some solar features, does the opposite. Elijah, who\nascends to heaven on a fiery chariot with a fiery horse, the \u2018hairy\nman,\u2019 curses the soil of the Hebrew land in the time of Ahab (again a\nlocalising and chronological limitation of what the myth had told in\ngeneral terms without such limitation) with drought, want of rain, and\nunfruitfulness; he is the cause of a fearful famine (1 Kings XVII. 1).\n\nThe \u2018Multiplier\u2019 has also severe contests to sustain. The most\ncelebrated of them is that which he maintains against her who loves him\ndearly, whose name is preserved to us only in legendary\ntradition\u2014Zal\u00eech\u00e2, the \u2018Swift-marching.\u2019[485] We know her already. He\nflies from the temptress, but _leaves his cloak in her hand_ (Gen.\nXXXIX. 12). This feature, which seems to us only accessory, may have\nbeen an important element of the original myth. We shall see further on,\nthat the figures of the night-sky or the dark sky generally are provided\nwith a covering or cloak, with which they cover over the earth or the\nsun, and thus produce darkness. It is a different battle that he fights\nagainst his brothers, the \u2018Possessors of arrows,\u2019 i.e. the sun-rays,\nwhich shoot at the rain-cloud and try to drive it off. Joseph\u2019s\npersecution by his own brothers and expulsion to Egypt is only the other\nside of the Egyptian myth of Osiris and Typhon and the Phenician myth of\nAdonis; the solar hero being in the latter cases, and the rain-hero in\nthe former case, the object of persecution. While the sarcophagus of\nOsiris starts from Egypt on its travels, and lands at Byblos on the\nPhenician coast, Joseph when sold goes in the opposite direction from\nCanaan to Egypt. Both these myths became local legends, one in Egypt,\nthe other in Canaan; consequently the direction of the wandering is\nmodified in conformity with the locality.\n\nFrom the battle of the rainy sky against the solar heroes with their\narrows our myth makes the Rainbow to arise: just as the lightning was\ncalled \u2018the Arrow of God,\u2019 so the rainbow was in later times described\nas the \u2018Bow of God\u2019 (\u1e33asht\u00ee, Gen. IX. 13). The later legend of\ncivilisation gives to the rainbow a foundation which is quite foreign to\nmythology. In mythology the rainbow appears to be attributed to Joseph,\nwho, when overcome and driven off the field by the \u2018Possessors of\narrows,\u2019 is after all not totally defeated, for \u2018his bow abode in\nstrength\u2019 (Gen. XLIX. 24). This expression indicates the following\nconception. When the rain-cloud was driven from its place by the solar\nheroes, he fixed his bow in the sky, to be ready for a future fight.\nThus in the Hebrew myth the rainbow is a bow belonging to the hero of\nstorms. We find the same idea in the Arabic mythology. Besides other\nnames, the rainbow bears that of \u1e33ausu \u1e32uza\u1e25a, \u2018the bow of \u1e32uza\u1e25\u2019 (who\nhas been proved to be a storm-hero); and it may be gathered from some\npassages which Tuch has incidentally brought together in his Treatise on\nSinaitic Inscriptions,[486] that \u1e32uza\u1e25 shoots his arrows of lightning\nduring the storms from this same bow, which after the conclusion of the\nbattle appears in the sky. In the same Hebrew hymn which contains the\nabove mention of the Bow, ebhen Yisr\u00e2\u02be\u00eal \u2018the Stone of Israel\u2019 is named.\nPerhaps I am not at fault in conjecturing that the Stone here has a\nsolar signification, and is used of the Sun which after the victory over\nJoseph appears on the firmament. We know from Schwartz\u2019s[487]\ndemonstrations, which Kuhn has recently confirmed in his academical\ntreatise on the stages of development in the formation of Myths, that in\nmythical language the sun and other luminous bodies are called \u2018stones.\u2019\nTo the same mythic cycle belongs the circumstance that David slays his\ngiant-foe by casting stones. And tradition[488] says that Cain killed\nAbel by throwing stones. But on the whole we find in the above-quoted\nhymn (called Jacob\u2019s) only slight hints that can be claimed for the\nmythic period; for the remains of primeval hymns like that fragment were\nin later times so overgrown with matter derived from historical\ncircumstances, that we must be content if we can discover what were the\npoints of view and conceptions chiefly represented by these fragments.\nThe reason why it is so difficult to reconstruct the old mythic view of\nthe Hebrews concerning the Rainbow, obviously lies in the fact that it\nwas supplanted by a later theological explanation (Gen. IX. 12\u201317). It\nis curious that the reason assigned in this later passage for the origin\nof the Rainbow was not able to obtain general credence, and that even\nChristian popular legends frequently appear to flow from ancient mythic\nconceptions. I will only mention an instance given by Bernhard\nSchmidt\u2014the Christians in Zante call the rainbow 'the girdle, or the bow\nof the Virgin, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b6\u03ce\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03cc\u03be\u03bf \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.[489]\n\n\n\u00a7 13. Now while Jacob\u2019s lawful wives are mythical figures homogeneous to\nhimself, as we have seen, his collateral wives, the two concubines\nZilpah and Bilhah represent figures of the ancient myth standing in a\nposition of opposition to Jacob. The mythical character of Zilpah has\nbeen already determined, in the Seventh Section of this chapter. For\nthis determination we had no other resource but the etymology of the\nname, no mythical matter having been preserved concerning this mythical\nfigure. The case is reversed when we enquire into the meaning of Bilhah.\nThe resource of etymology abandons us here; for, even if we assume that\nthe abstract idea represented by the name must here be understood in a\nparticipial sense (Bilh\u00e2=\u2018the Trembling, Terrified\u2019), yet, in the want\nof analogous cases, the signification of the name brings us to no track\nworth pursuing. But, on the other hand, we fortunately have a material\nmyth (as opposed to a mere name), relating to Bilhah: \u2018Reuben went and\nlay with Bilhah his father\u2019s concubine\u2019 (Gen. XXXV. 22).\n\nThe transition from one aspect of nature to another is not always\nregarded by the myth from the point of view of a battle, in which the\nvanishing aspect is represented by the conquered and the approaching one\nby the conqueror. The myth speaks equally frequently of love and union,\ni.e. of sexual connexion. The vanishing aspect disappears in that which\nimmediately follows: they become one, as man and wife. In the myths of\nsexual union, the mythical feature that the two figures one of which\nfollows the other are brother and sister, father and daughter, or mother\nand son, is sometimes disregarded. We had an example of this in the\nHebrew myth of the union of Shechem with Dinah. This is very frequent in\nAryan mythology; and it is sufficient to refer to the part of Max\nM\u00fcller\u2019s essay which deals with this subject.[490] There is a very fine\nmyth of this kind, preserved in a work ascribed to Plutarch, _De\nfluviorum et montium nominibus_ (IV. 3). It is there said with reference\nto the Ganges, \u2018Near it is situated the mountain _Anatole_, or the\nRising,\u2019 so called for the following reason: \u2018Helios saw the maiden\nAnaxibia dancing there, and was seized with violent love for her. No\nlonger able to control his passion, he pursued her with desire to force\nher to yield to his desire. The maiden, surrounded on every side,\nescaped into the temple of Artemis Orthia on the mountain Koryphe, and\nwas lost to the eyes of her pursuer. He, following after, and unable to\novertake his beloved, went up to the same mountain grieving. Therefore\nthe natives call the mountain Anatole or \u2018Sun-uprising,\u2019 as Kaemarus\nnarrates in the tenth book of his \u2018Indian Affairs.\u2019[491] Here, where the\nsunrise is not even the result of a union, but very characteristically\nthat of disappointed love, Helios is no relative whatever of the Dawn,\nany more than Shechem of Dinah, or Abimelech, the later Sun-god (Melekh,\ncompare Abh\u00eeba\u02bfal and Ba\u02bfal), of Rebekah, whom he loves (Gen. XXVI), or\nof Sarah, \u2018Moon,\u2019 whom he takes to himself (Gen. XX). However, the view\nwhich we shall encounter in the myth of Lot, that the lovers or united\ncouples are blood-relations, brother and sister, or parent and child, is\nmore prevalent. The idea of a son in love with his mother is quite\ngeneral in Asiatic mythology, as Lenormant proves: in the old Babylonian\nmythology D\u00e2z\u00ee, the Hebrew Tamm\u00fbz, is lover of his mother Istar,\n&c.;[492] among the Egyptians Am\u00f4n is called the husband of his mother\nNeith; and among the Hindus P\u00fbshan is described as both his sister\u2019s\nlover and his mother\u2019s husband. When after long darkness a mysterious\nTwilight slowly advanced, followed by the Dawn with ever-increasing\nrapidity, the Aryan said, \u2018Praj\u00e2pati loves his own daughter Ushas and\nforces her,\u2019 or \u2018Indra seduces Ahaly\u00e2 the Night,\u2019 or forms a union with\nhis mother Dahan\u00e2.[493] To the same class Sarah also seems to belong, as\nshe is not only wife but also sister of Abram. Reuben marries Bilhah,\nhis mother, or more correctly his father\u2019s wife. Reuben is a figure\nhomogeneous to Jacob, and therefore belongs to the night, as we discover\nmost certainly from the circumstance that in the battle of the\n\u2018Possessors of arrows\u2019 against Joseph he is on the side of the latter\nand tries to save him, while Judah, a solar man, proposes to sell Joseph\n(Gen. XXXVII. 21, 26). In a myth such sympathy indicates that the\nsubject and object of it are at all events not hostile figures: we have\nalready seen this in the relations between Isaac and Esau and between\nRebekah and Jacob. However, Reuben here seems not to be the night in\ngeneral, but the twilight which forms the beginning and the end of the\nnight, if we attach weight to the fact that Reuben is Jacob\u2019s son.\nThough unimportant and not even necessary for the appreciation of the\nmyth, this is very probable. The Sun is the mother of the Twilight, for\nthe twilight proceeds from the sun. So when at the end of the night the\nmorning-darkness gives way to the sun or dawn and disappears in them,\nReuben and Bilhah are united. Whatever part the twilight may play here,\nit is at least clear that this myth speaks of the union of Night with\nits mother Day: when Night gives place to Day, from whose womb it was\nborn but yesterday, then the myth says \u2018Reuben is marrying his mother.\u2019\n\n\n\u00a7 14. But before we continue the chapter on love and sexual union, the\nmaterials of which are mainly drawn from the history of Jacob\u2019s family,\nit is desirable to insert some remarks on the mythological significance\nof that family. Our mythological observation leads to the following\nresult. From its first commencement the myth speaks of _twelve children_\nof Jacob, i.e. of the dark night-sky. These children, on whose names the\nmyth lays no stress, can hardly be anything else than the shining troop\nwhich has its home in the night-sky\u2014the Moon and the Eleven Stars (comp.\nGen. XXXVII. 9, achad \u02bf\u00e2s\u00e2r k\u00f4kh\u00e2bh\u00eem). These are Jacob\u2019s children,\nthough in a different sense from that in which Isaac is the son of\nAbraham, or Joseph the son of Rachel. In these latter instances the\nconception of a parental and filial relation was the result of the\nimpression produced upon the creators of myths by constant succession;\nin the case of Jacob\u2019s sons it is only meant that the eleven stars and\nthe moon together form the Family of the Night-sky. This conception\nhaving once been grasped, there was nothing to hinder creators of myths\nfrom speaking of a son of Jacob who did not belong to that Family. And\nif there were a myth which said that Jacob fought with his son, as is\nsaid of Abraham, then we could not seek such a son in the family of\nstars which fills Jacob\u2019s house. It is a general rule which must never\nbe lost out of sight in the investigation of myths, that mythology does\nnot present a _system_, whose separate elements are comprehensive\nresults, or abstractions from _continuous_ observation of nature. What\nis told in the myth expresses how each _single_ observation affects the\nmind of man. Hence the various modes in which the myth speaks of a\nphenomenon; viewing it from various positions, it constantly changes the\nnames, and recognises different relations. Whoever finds contradictions\nin all this must not turn against the interpreter and reconstructor of\nthe myth, but against the mind of man itself which created myths: his\ndispute lies with the latter, not with the method of mythological\nscience.\n\nJacob\u2019s twelve sons, who are mentioned by name in the document in\nGenesis, can hardly have had their separate existence acknowledged at so\nearly an age as that of the myth which comprised them under the general\nname of the twelve sons of the starry sky. Fathers of tribes with twelve\nor thirteen children (even in the numeration of Jacob\u2019s children this\nuncertainty of number occurs) are frequently met with in Biblical\ngenealogies, e.g. Joktan, Nahor, and Ishmael. The same tendency towards\nthe number twelve is encountered in genealogies in other parts of the\nworld. In the Ojibwa legend Getube has twelve children, of whom the\neldest is called Mujekewis, and the youngest, who obtains great power\nand successfully repels the evil spirits, Wa-jeeg-e-wa-kon-ay.[494] At a\nlater time, when a harmonising of the legendary matter, not from a set\npurpose, but from the acknowledged tendency of the human mind to bridge\nover contradictions, was going on, then a desire was felt to know the\nnames of the twelve sons. When mythic consciousness and the stage when\nthe mind was self-impelled to mythic conception were long passed, and\nthe real meaning of names connected by mythology with certain deeds was\nno longer known, twelve such names, most of which had no longer any\nmeaning, were taken at random and called Jacob\u2019s twelve sons. Thus were\nobtained twelve names to answer the general proposition, \u2018The Twelve\nform the Family of Jacob.\u2019 Among these names there are true sons of\nJacob, i.e. some who are declared by the myth itself to be so: here the\ngenealogical narrator employed data derived from the myth. Next, there\nare some among them whom the myth treats not as sons of Jacob but as\nsons of his wives. For we must not forget that when Joseph is said to be\nson of Rachel, the myth does not trouble itself to ask who the father\nwas. The conception that \u2018the Rain is the son of the Cloud,\u2019 which is\nexpounded in the mythic description of Joseph\u2019s birth, is not the result\nof any consideration of the names of the two parents who gave life to\nhim; but the myth-former, seeing the cloud heavy with rain and observing\nthe rain dripping from its lap, combined these two impressions and said,\n\u2018The Cloud has borne the Rain.\u2019 The later genealogical story could then\neasily find a father for the children of Zilpah, Rachel and others, in\nhim whom the myth introduces as husband of those female figures.\n\nOther Hebrew tribes have names totally free from any mythical character,\nand ethnographical (Judah) or geographical in nature. The last\nespecially must of course have originated after the conquest of Canaan,\nsince they are connected with geographical peculiarities of that land.\nOne of these is Ephraim, whose name we shall see in the Fourth Section\nof the Eighth Chapter to be derived from the name of the town Ephrathah;\nanother is Benjamin. The name Bin-y\u00e2m\u00een is associated with the division\nof the land, and signifies _Son of the right side_. The tribe was\nprobably so called by the leading tribe of Judah, on whose right side\nBenjamin was his next neighbour.[495] Yet myths have attached themselves\neven to these geographical and ethnographical names, as they have to\nmany historical ones. Concerning some no mythical features have been\npreserved, which is most to be regretted in the case of Gad. This name\noccurs in a later age with a religious signification (Is. LXV. 11), and\nwould doubtless yield much instruction if a fuller myth gave us insight\ninto its original meaning and connexion. Gad is commonly held to be the\nso-called Star of Fortune (Jupiter); but it is difficult to determine\nwhether Gad\u2019s sons, when they were called his sons, were put into\nconnexion with the Star. If they were, we should have a case analogous\nto the Arabic appellation \u2018Daughters of the star al-\u1e6c\u00e2ri\u1e33\u2019 (see above,\np. 57). As some Arabian tribes call themselves \u2018Sons of the Rain\u2019 (ben\u00fb\nm\u00e2 al-sam\u00e2), &c. so the Hebrew tribes, at the time when the myth still\nlived in the understanding of all, took names from the mythical figures,\none calling itself \u2018Sons of the Longhaired,\u2019 another \u2018Sons of the\nMultiplier\u2019 &c. I think I cannot be wrong in assuming this nomenclature\nof the tribes to be older than the assignation of names to each of\nJacob\u2019s twelve sons. When the names of tribes had long been in\nexistence, they were brought forward to serve as names for Jacob\u2019s sons;\nand thus they laid the foundation of the genealogical tradition which\ntraces the people of Israel to its first father Jacob, and thence goes\nback to his father and to Abraham.[496] But the mythical matter\ntransmitted to us concerning the twelve who are introduced as the sons\nof Jacob, independently of what we have already discussed, is very\nlittle. Some names resist any reasonable etymology, or at least any\netymology consonant with the character of mythical appellations. Still,\neven from these scanty materials we can pick out some single points that\nseem worthy of preservation as relics of the old Hebrew mythology. If\nthe investigation of this subject is to be successfully pushed further\nthan I can pretend to do in this treatise, the accurate enquirer will\nhave especially to adduce the forty-ninth chapter of Genesis, known as\n\u2018Jacob\u2019s Blessing,\u2019 from which I have already borrowed materials. In\nthis ancient piece I am convinced that many fragments of _hymns_ are\ncontained which originally had for their subject those mythical figures\nto which in their present form as _blessings_ they refer. We have in\nthis fragment a sort of Hebrew Veda before our eyes.\n\nThose figures among Jacob\u2019s sons, of whom I venture to treat,[497] so\nfar as there are means available have a solar character, with the\nexception of those which we have already recognised to be figures of the\nsky of night and clouds, and of one other figure (Levi) in which we\nshall discover something antagonistic to solarism. Zebh\u00fbl\u00fbn was seen\neven by Gesenius to mean the _Round_, _Globular_. Though we cannot find\nany analogous expression as a name for the sun, it must be acknowledged\nto be a very natural one. I believe that Zebh\u00fbl\u00fbn designates the sun at\nthe end of its course when its red ball appears on the horizon of the\nsea. Anyone who has had the opportunity of admiring a sunset at the\nsea-side, will understand why people living there should call the\nsetting sun _globular_; for its true globular form is especially\nperceptible and striking in such localities. That the name Zebh\u00fbl\u00fbn owes\nits origin to such considerations is evident from the language of the\nHymn to Zebulun: \u2018he rests at the edge of the sea\u2019 (lech\u00f4ph yamm\u00eem\nyishk\u00f4n, Gen. XLIX. 13); and this verse (especially in yishk\u00f4n) further\nconfirms what was said on p. 116. Napht\u00e2l\u00ee (from the root _ptl_, \u2018to\ntwine, twist,\u2019 whence p\u00e2th\u00eel \u2018thread\u2019), is \u2018he of the plaited locks of\nhair.\u2019 The Hymn calls him \u2018a hind let loose\u2019 (ayy\u00e2l\u00e2 shel\u00fbch\u00e2, ver. 21),\nwhich is decisive for the solar meaning of Napht\u00e2l\u00ee with the locks of\nhair. For the Semites call the Dawn a _hind_\u2014the Hebrews ayyeleth\nhash-shachar \u2018the Hind of the Dawn\u2019 (Ps. XXII. 1), the Arabs\nal-\u0121az\u00e2l\u00e2.[498] Even the Talm\u00fbd seeks and finds the reason for the\nidentification of the Dawn with a Hind;[499] and another ancient\nJewish-Arabic philologist, Moses ben Ezra, in his book on Poetry, also\nrecognised the connexion of this appellation in Hebrew and in\nArabic.[500] Accordingly, we must think of a solar interpretation when\nwe read that among the furniture of the ancient Ka\u02bfb\u00e2 at Mekka, besides\nvarious idols, there were _golden Gazelles_, which were carried off and\nburied by the Jurhumites, but found again by \u02bfAbd-al-Mu\u1e6d\u1e6dalib in the\nwell Zemzem.[501] The mythical description of the rising sun as a hind\nor gazelle is explained by the animal\u2019s horns; for the myth which\nregards the Sun\u2019s rays sometimes as arrows, sometimes as locks of hair,\nalso treats them sometimes as horns. For this reason the Hebrew language\nhas only one word to denote \u2018horn\u2019 and \u2018ray of light,\u2019 viz., \u1e33eren; and\nfor the same reason Moses, who received many features of the solar myth,\nas Steinthal has pertinently proved in his treatise on the Story of\nPrometheus,[502] was imagined provided with horns, i.e., with beaming\ncountenance (Ex. XXXIV. 29, 30, 35), a symbol which sacred art has\npreserved only too faithfully. In the Edda the point of the horn of\nHeimdall (the sun) is fixed in Niflheim (abode of cloud), i.e. the rays\nof the sun come forth out of darkness. The glyptic representation of the\nAssyrian god B\u00eal in the Louvre is adorned with a tiara surrounded by a\nrow of ox-horns. In the Accadian mythology the name of the goddess\nNinka-si, \u2018the Lady of the horned face,\u2019 as Lenormant translates it, has\nundoubtedly a solar character.[503] The same is the case with the\nEgyptian Isis: \u03a4\u1f78 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f10\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03ca\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f38\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, says Herodotus (II. 41). Lucian, the\nfrivolous scoffer at everything religious, expresses his surprise to\nZeus why he is represented with ram\u2019s horns;[504] to which he makes Zeus\nreply by referring to a mystery into which the uninitiated cannot\npenetrate.[505] In a word, Naphtali of the long locks, Naphtali the\nswift hind, is certainly identical with the \u2018Hind of the Dawn.\u2019\n\nWhether the name Yeh\u00fbd\u00e2 (Judah) belongs to mythology, or was an early\nethnical name before tradition introduced it as that of a Patriarch, is\ndifficult to determine. If the name Yeh\u00fbd\u00e2 could be referred to an\netymon which exhibited a solar signification, we should decide for the\nformer alternative, on account of the solar characteristics which are\nattached to the name. The most plausible etymological explanation would\nbe \u2018the Splendid,\u2019 or (on account of the feminine termination \u00e2, added\nto the passive participle with an abstract force) \u2018Splendour.\u2019 But if\nthe second alternative be correct, and the name Yeh\u00fbd\u00e2 had from the\nfirst only an ethnographical force, then, as in the case of other names\nnot belonging to primeval myths, we must suppose that the solar myths,\nin company with which we find these historical names, were attached to\nthem in later times.\n\nIt is a true solar legend[506] that Judah forms a sexual connexion with\nTamar. The latter name denotes \u2018Fruit;\u2019 and the myth of her union with\nJudah expresses the fact that the autumn-sun pours its rays over the\nfruits of the trees and fields. Thus the Hebrew agriculturist may have\nsaid at harvest-time, when the hot rays of the sun rapidly ripened the\nfruits: and he may at such a time, especially with reference to the\nvintage, have addressed to the autumn sun \u2018Yeh\u00fbd\u00e2\u2019 the hymn which is\ncontained in the so-called _Jacob\u2019s Blessing_ for Judah (Gen. XLIX.\n11\u201313):\n\n He binds to the vine his foal,\n To the wine-tree his ass\u2019s young one.\n He washes in wine his clothes,\n And in blood of the vine his covering.\n _Reddish is his eye from wine,_\n _And white his teeth from milk._\n\nThis is a truly mythic picture of the Sun, pairing at vintage-time with\nthe Vine. The red eyes and white teeth need no further discussion after\nwhat has been said in \u00a7 11 of this chapter. But a few words are needed\nin explanation of what is said of the ass and foal. It is sufficient to\npoint to the fact that the reddish-brown ass is one of the animals used\nin the old mythology to designate the sun.[507] The point of resemblance\nmust be sought in the _reddish_ colour; and hence in the Semitic\nlanguages the ass is called the _Red_ (Hebrew cham\u00f4r, \u2018ass\u2019; Arabic\na\u1e25mar, \u2018red\u2019).[508] It is probably in consequence of the solar\nsignificance of the ass, that Shechem\u2019s father is named \u2018the Ass\u2019\n(Hamor; and in Arabic \u2018Ass\u2019 is a very frequent personal name),[509] and\nIssachar is described as a bony ass. Therefore to say, as is said in our\nhymn, that the foal and the colt are bound to the vine is equivalent to\nsaying that \u2018the Sun forms a connexion with the Vine;\u2019 it is only a\ndifferent view of the myth of the connexion of Judah with Tamar. This\nconnexion of the Sun and the Fruit, which is the fundamental thought of\nthe myth of Judah and Tamar, was developed with the aid of other\nelements into the later form found in the story in Gen. XXXVIII. The\nsame myth was also attached to figures of the historical age in the\nlegend of Amnon and Tamar (2 Sam. XIII. 1\u201320). David\u2019s son Amnon loves\nhis sister Tamar; and keeping her near him to wait upon him under the\npretence of being ill, takes the opportunity to ravish her. Here the\nmyth of the love of the Sun for the Fruit has been transferred to Amnon,\na perfect unmythical personage. But Tamar is here quite the same as the\npersonage whose connexion with Judah is described in Genesis; although\nin the legend of Amnon and Tamar it is Amnon who pursues Tamar, whereas\nin that of Judah and Tamar the intriguer and seducer is Tamar. When\npeople in ancient times perceived the fruit of the tree gradually change\nits colour till the autumn-sun shone on it, after which it fell down\nripe, they saw in this a love-affair between the Sun and Fruit, which\nended with their union. We have here, therefore, to do with that phrase\nof mythology in which men, as agriculturists, but still standing on the\nmyth-creating stage of intellectual life, speak of vegetation and its\ncauses in terms which later, at the religious stage, will give rise to\ndualistic religious ideas. Different from the Iranian religious dualism,\nwhich sets up two mutually hostile powers, this dualism will put side by\nside two factors of the course of vegetation (see above, p. 15). This\nkind of dualism is met with very frequently in the Semitic\u2014especially\nNorth and Middle Semitic\u2014religions. Indeed, were we to investigate\nclosely the legends and love-stories which fill the history of the\nArabic nation and tribes before Isl\u00e2m, we should probably discover\nmythological matter turned into history, which would possess great\nsimilarity with the legend of Judah and Tamar. We will select here one\nonly of these stories, which has preserved transparently enough its\nmythical character. On the mountains \u1e62af\u00e2 and Marw\u00e2, which still play a\npart in the pilgrimage to Mekka, there formerly stood two idols named\nIs\u00e2f and N\u00e2\u02beil\u00e2, who were said to have been two persons of Jurhum who\nhaving committed improprieties in the Ka\u02bfb\u00e2 were turned into stone in\npunishment for desecration of the holy place[510]\u2014which, be it\nincidentally observed, is no rare offence in modern times. It need\nscarcely be observed that this conformation of the story is due to a\ndistinct Mohammedan tendency imparted to it, and that the interpreter of\nthe myth has to regard only the germ of the story\u2014the sexual union of\nN\u00e2\u02beil\u00e2 with Is\u00e2f. Now the mere translation of these words give us to\nunderstand the meaning of the myth. Is\u00e2f means _solum sterile,\nunfruitful ground_, and N\u00e2\u02beil\u00e2, _she who presents_ (a _nomen agentis_\nfrom n\u00e2la \u2018to present\u2019). No deep acquaintance with Arabic literature is\nnecessary to convince one that the latter name may be simply an epithet\nof the Rain, which the Arabs can as readily call the Giver as they\ncompare a liberal giver with the rain (compare geshem ned\u00e2bh\u00f4th, Ps.\nLXVIII. 10 [9]). Thus the liberal Rain unites with the unfruitful Ground\nand encourages vegetation. Out of this, as out of most unions of this\nsort, sexual licence was evolved at a later time.\n\nThe names of Judah\u2019s sons, Perez and Zerah,[511] are solar: the latter\ndenoting \u2018the Shining one,\u2019 who comes into the world with a red thread\non his hand, and the former \u2018he who breaks forth.\u2019 This name is founded\non the same idea as is present in the German _Tagesanbruch_,[512] the\nHungarian _Hajnalhasad\u00e1s_, i.e. \u2018the breaking through of the dawn\u2019[513]\n(exactly the same as Perez), the Arabic, fajar (especially infajar\nal-\u1e63ub\u1e25 or infajar al-fata\u1e33 \u2018erupit aurora\u2019).[514] The dawn breaks\nthrough, or rather tears asunder, the veil of darkness and breaks forth\nout of it.\n\nAfter this survey of the solar figures found among Jacob\u2019s sons, we will\nconclude this section with the consideration of another mythical name\nbelonging to the class of designations of Jacob\u2019s sons which is\nconnected with the dark sky of clouds and night. This is _Levi_. If we\ncontemplate this name unbiassed by the etymological explanation of it\ngiven in the Bible (from l\u00e2v\u00e2 \u2018to cleave to\u2019), I think we shall not be\ninclined to doubt that L\u00eav\u00ee bears the same relation to the serpent\u2019s\nname livy\u00e2th\u00e2n, as another serpent\u2019s name n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh bears to the enlarged\nform nechusht\u00e2n, which is given as the name of the brazen serpent broken\nin pieces by King Hezekiah (2 Kings XVIII. 4). The name certainly does\nnot denote \u2018brazen;\u2019 for an image is more naturally named from the\nobject it represents than from the matter of which it is made. And the\nform livy\u00e2th\u00e2n necessarily presupposes a simpler form, from which it\ncould be derived by the addition of the termination \u00e2th\u00e2n (or only \u00e2n,\nif we suppose the original word to have passed through the feminine form\nlivyat), as nechusht\u00e2n necessitates the preexistence of the simpler\nn\u00e2ch\u00e2sh. If we have in English a word _earthly_, then, even if no word\n_earth_ actually existed at the time in the language, we could with\nperfect justice assert _a priori_ that the word _earth_ must have once\nexisted, in order to make the formation of _earthly_ possible. Similarly\nthe existence of the form livy\u00e2th\u00e2n justifies the assumption of a simple\nnoun-form, as the basis of that derivative enlarged by suffixes.\n\nNow fortunately this simple form is preserved to us in the name L\u00eav\u00ee,\nand we may therefore unhesitatingly affirm that Levi means \u2018Serpent.\u2019\nMythology speaks of a serpent that devours the sun, of a Storm-Serpent,\nwhich the Sun assails with his rays; they are the serpents, dragons and\nmonsters with whom the Solar heroes of the Aryan mythology wage their\ncontests, which Herakles even in his cradle crushes and afterwards\noverpowers at Lerna and Nemea; the same, which sometimes, on the other\nhand, keep their ground and come forth victorious from the battle with\nthe Sun, when the Sun, repulsed by a boisterous Storm, is forced to\nabandon the celestial battle-field.\n\n A serpent on the way,\n An adder on the path,\n That bites the horse\u2019s heels,\n So that the rider falls backwards,\n\n(Gen. XLIX. 17), they are called in the Hebrew hymn of the battle of the\nRain-serpent with the Sun-horse.[515] It is this same serpent that bears\na \u2018fiery flying serpent\u2019 (s\u00e2r\u00e2ph me\u02bf\u00f4ph\u00eaph, Is. XIV. 29), i.e. the\nLightning; that in common with the lightning is called the \u2018Flying\nSerpent\u2019 (n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh b\u00e2r\u00eeach, Is. XXVII. 1), for whose conqueror the Sun,\nthe monotheistic ideas of later times substituted Jahveh \u2018who with his\nmight lashes the sea, and who with his intelligence pierces the monster\n(Rahab); by whose breath the heaven becomes bright, whose hand has\nstabbed the _flying serpent_\u2019 (Job XXVI. 12, 13). The hissing of this\nflying Serpent is said in an American myth to be the Thunder; and the\nLightning is called by the Algonquins an immense serpent, which God spat\nout.[516] The Rain itself is regarded in mythology as a serpent; the\ncolumns of water which fall in a serpentine course to the earth are\ncalled the \u2018Crooked Serpent\u2019 (n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh \u02bfa\u1e33all\u00e2th\u00f4n). The flying\nLightning, the crooked Serpent (both livy\u00e2th\u00e2n), and the great Monster\nin the sea, which tries to devour the Sun when he sinks into the sea in\nthe evening, are assailed by the Sun, and the monotheistic prophet\ntransfers the attack upon them to Jahveh (Is. XXVII. 1; compare Ps.\nLXXVI. 4 [3]). It is to be noted that, in speaking of night and storms,\neven the later poetry uses the expression that they \u2018bite, wound,\u2019\nbecause the Serpent of darkness and tempest bites and hurts the Sun. \u2018I\nsaid, Surely the darkness will bite me (yesh\u00fbph\u00ean\u00ee), and the night [will\nbite] the light near me\u2019 (Ps. CXXXIX. 11); and so of the storm (Job IX.\n17). Everywhere here the verb is used which is employed in Gen. III. 15\nto denote that the serpent wounds the heel of the man. In these passages\nof poetry, therefore, we find an echo of the myth which declares that\nthe Serpent of the storm, when victorious, bites, wounds, or even\nswallows down the hero of the Sun. We encounter the Rain described still\nmore clearly as a serpent in the sacred literature of the Parsees, in\nthe first chapter of the Vendid\u00e2d, verse 2, where it is said that\nAhuramazdao created Airyana-va\u00eaj\u00f4 to be the best of all lands, whilst in\nopposition to his act the Deadly Aegr\u00f4 mainyus created the \u2018flowing\nserpent\u2019 (azhim raoidhitem) and the snow. Professor Haug was the\ndiscoverer of this explanation of the _azhim raoidhitem_;[517]\nnevertheless he translates it \u2018a powerful serpent,\u2019 as he thinks that\nthe word \u2018flowing\u2019 can be only understood of the ejection of the venom,\nor of the writer\u2019s remembrance of a warm spring which may have existed\nin the land Airyana-va\u00eaj\u00f4. It is a very obvious conjecture that the\n_flowing_ serpent means the Rain; the more so because it is mentioned in\nconjunction with Snow.[518] The last shoots of this mythological\nconception are discovered in the system of the Ophites, in which the\nserpent represents a _moist substance_.[519]\n\nLevi (with Simeon, whose etymological value is no longer determinable),\nis introduced in the Hebrew myth (Gen. XXXIV.) as the slayer of Cham\u00f4r\n\u2018the Ass\u2019 and Shekem (see above, p. 125). Of the same two brothers it is\nsaid in the fragments of hymns already quoted, sometimes that \u2018for their\namusement they destroyed the bull\u2019 (XLIX. 6)\u2014the horned solar animal\nwhose horns (rays) the storm-serpents eradicate (\u02bfi\u1e33\u1e33er\u00fb). It is at the\nsame time perfectly clear in this interpretation that no difficulty at\nall resides in what is always troubling the expounders of these\npassages\u2014in the fact, namely, that these brothers are said in the hymn\n(or Blessing) to have killed a bull (sh\u00f4r), whilst no mention is made in\nthe narrative of any such act.\n\n\n\u00a7 15. In the Biblical story of the family of Jacob we have met with a\nfew of those myths of Love which the Aryan mythology developed in such\nvariety and richness. One of the best known myths of this kind is the\nstory of Oedipus and Jokaste. The king of Thebes received a sad oracle,\ndeclaring that he would be exposed to serious danger from a son who\nwould be born to him by his wife Jokaste. He therefore exposed Oedipus,\nhis new-born son; and the latter, having been marvellously saved from\ndeath and educated at Corinth, travelled to Thebes when grown to\nmanhood, but killed his father on the way. Arrived at Thebes, he\ndelivered the city from the terror of the Sphinx, and was proclaimed\nking, after which he married his mother Jokaste. When he received\ninformation of the two horrible crimes that he had unconsciously\ncommitted, the murder of his father and the incest with his mother, in\ndespair he put out his own eyes and came to a tragic end. Everyone knows\nthis celebrated Hellenic story, which in the Oedipus-Tragedy was worked\nout powerfully in its ethical bearings so as to excite the emotions and\ntouch the heart.\n\nOedipus kills his father, marries his mother, and dies, a blind and\nworn-out old man. The hero of the Sun murders the father who begot\nhim\u2014the Darkness; he shares his bed with his mother\u2014the Evening-glow,\nfrom whose womb (in the character of the Morning-glow) he had been born;\nhe dies _blind_\u2014the Sun sets. We have seen above that the setting sun\nloses the bright light of its eyes.[520]\n\nWhat a universal act of the human mind, and how little affected by\nethnological distinctions, the production of myths is, and what\nagreement is consequently discovered in the direction taken by this\nmyth-formation among the most dissimilar peoples and races of the earth,\nwill be most strikingly brought home to us by the discovery that this\nvery myth of marriage with a mother occurs among the Hebrews just as\nmuch as among the Aryans. We have already seen that Reuben marries his\nfather\u2019s wife Bilhah. We observe that in the Hebrew myth the hero of\nDarkness occupies the central position, whereas in the Hellenic it is\nthe Solar hero who shares his mother\u2019s bed. But while the myth of Reuben\nand Bilhah is only mentioned quite shortly in the Old Testament, there\nis another myth which has grown into a long story in the Biblical\nnarrative\u2014that of Lot\u2019s daughters. But before we pass to this, I wish to\ncall attention to a concurrence which I believe has never yet been\nnoticed, but which may excite to further meditations. The whole story of\nOedipus, quite in the form in which we find it among the Hellenes,\noccurs also as an _Arabic tradition_, without change except in the\npersons. One of the many Nimrods which the Arabic legend seized upon\n(six Nam\u00e2rid\u00e2 \u2018Nimrods\u2019 are commonly reckoned),[521] son of Kena\u02bfan and\nSalch\u00e2, is the Oedipus of the Arabic story. In consequence of an\nintimidating prophecy, he is exposed by his parents, that he may die and\nnot be a source of danger to his father. But he is miraculously suckled\nby a tigress (whence his name Nimr\u00fbd is said to be derived, for nimr is\n\u2018tiger\u2019 in Arabic), and subsequently brought up by the inhabitants of a\nneighbouring village. When grown to manhood he contrives to bring\ntogether a great army, and becomes involved in a war against his father\nKena\u02bfan, whom he slays in the decisive battle. He marches in triumph\ninto his capital, and marries his mother Salch\u00e2. Thus the outlines of\nthe Oedipus-story have been attached to the solar hero of the Semites,\nNimrod the hunter. The story is told at full length in the long\nintroduction to the Romance of \u02bfAntar (I. 13 _seq._), and I leave it to\nreaders competent to judge, to decide between two possibilities. Either\nthe Arabs borrowed from the Greeks and simply took to themselves this\nversion of the Oedipus-story; in this case the remarkable fact of such a\ntransference would provoke a searching enquiry into the middle points\nbetween Greece and Arabia, which made it possible to borrow mythology,\nand also into the extent and nature of such borrowings. Or we may assume\nthat the story was independently and gradually formed by the Arabs\nwithout external influence, so that the elements of the Arabian as of\nthe Greek story reach back to the primeval age of the creation of myths,\nand that with the Arabs also it was originally a myth of the war of the\nSun with the Night, and his union with the Evening-glow. The latter view\nis favoured by the circumstance that in the Arabian version the story of\nOedipus putting out his eyes is wanting\u2014a feature which would certainly\nhave been taken if the Arabian story were only a borrowed one. But the\nabove-mentioned questions ought to be investigated before any decision\nin favour of one of these possibilities can be arrived at, however\ninclined I may be from personal feeling towards the assumption of\nborrowing.[522]\n\nThe story of Lot and his daughters as told in Genesis in one of the\nBiblical passages most notorious for its obscenity; let us see, however,\nwhat appears to have been its original meaning. When the aged L\u00f4\u1e6d and\nhis family were saved from the Divine judgment on Sodom and Gomorrha,\nwhich converted those cities into a sea of bitumen, he left his wife\nbehind him, converted into a pillar of salt, at a point of the coast of\nthe Dead Sea, which is still shown to credulous travellers, and lived in\na cave with his two unmarried daughters. These made their old father\ndrunk in two successive nights, and perpetrated with him an act of\nunchastity which is to us almost unmentionable (Gen. XIX. 30\u201338). But\nthe science of Mythology has often saved the honour and moral worth of\nprimitive humanity by restoring the original mythological meaning of\nmany a story; and so here we shall be able to prove that the L\u00f4\u1e6d-story,\nin the form in which we have received it, is only the tradition of the\nmyth of the Sun and the Night, the understanding of which was lost in a\nlater unmythological generation. Through the clever succession of ideas\nsuggested by the solar theory, the science of Mythology on Aryan ground\nat one blow caused the ideal heights of Olympus to tower in their\noriginal purity above the endless chain of scandalous acts which\nmythology misunderstood attributed to the immoral inhabitants of the\nmountain of the Gods; and the method which guides us in these studies\nwill aim at the same result on the domain of Hebrew mythology.\n\nWe return to L\u00f4\u1e6d. This name (formed from the root l\u00fb\u1e6d \u2018to cover\u2019)\ndenotes \u2018he who covers.\u2019 \u2018Darkness _covers_ the earth, and clouds the\nnations\u2019 (Is. LX. 2). \u2018For I did not shrink before the Darkness, when\nthick darkness _covered_ (everything) before my face\u2019 (Job XXIII. 17).\n\u2018Thou hast pressed us down to the dwelling-place of the sea-monsters,\nand _covered_ us _over_ with deep shadow\u2019 (Ps. XLIV. 20 [19]). The\nSemitic designations of darkness are mostly formed from roots denoting\n\u2018to cover\u2019: so e.g. \u02bfal\u00e2\u1e6d\u00e2 in Hebrew, \u02bfish\u00e2 in Arabic;[523] and the most\nprominent Semitic word for Night, layil, layl\u00e2, etymologically means\nonly something that _covers_.[524] In Aryan languages also, the Sanskrit\nVaru\u1e47a and the Greek \u03bf\u1f54\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, which denote the overclouded sky, are\nformed from the root _var_ \u2018to cover,\u2019 in opposition to the bright\nday-sky, Mitra.[525] Keeping on Semitic ground, we find in Arabic\ncopious illustrations of this conception. The words \u0121ashiya, damasa,\n\u0121atha, saja, etc. (compare \u0121arda\u1e33at al-leyl, ta\u02bea\u1e6d\u1e6dam al-leyl), combine\nthe notions of Darkness and Covering-up. Accordingly the coming on of\nnight is expressed by janna al-\u1e93al\u00e2m, literally \u2018the darkness has\ncovered up\u2019 (e.g. Romance of \u02bfAntar, V. 80. 3); and for the simple words\n\u2018of an evening,\u2019 or \u2018at night,\u2019 the Arabic expression is ta\u1e25t al-leyl\n\u2018under the night,\u2019[526] or fuller ta\u1e25t ast\u00e2r al-\u1e93al\u00e2m \u2018under the veils\nof the night\u2019 (\u02bfAntar, X. 70, 1); and the Night is above the day,\n\u2018aleyh\u00e2.\u2019[527] The Night is a garment or carpet spread out over the Day.\n\u2018It is he,\u2019 it is said in the \u1e32or\u00e2n (S\u00fbr. XXV. v. 49), \u2018who made the\nNight as a garment or veil for you.\u2019 \u2018We have made the Night as a\nclothing\u2019 (S\u00fbr. LXXVIII. v. 10).[528] The Arabic poet Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2\nal-Ma\u02bfarr\u00ee uses the most palpable expression for this conception of the\ndarkness of night. Describing his swift camels, on which he traversed\ngreat distances at Night, he says (I. 131. v. 4) \u2018in their swift course\nthey tore the mantle of night,\u2019 i.e. they ran so quickly that they\nunrolled the garment which covers the surface of the earth at night. On\nthis conception of the nature of Night I believe a peculiar expression\nin the Arabic language to be based. In the old classical Arabic, nights\nwhich either have no moonshine at all, or have none at the beginning and\nonly a little quite at the end, are called lay\u00e2lin dur\u02bfun; and when a\nverb is required, adra\u02bfa al-shahr is said. This adra\u02bfa is unquestionably\na denominative verb from dir\u02bf, which signifies a \u2018breast-plate,\u2019 or a\nbreast-covering of any sort. The Arabic expressions just quoted are\nfounded on the idea that the breast (al-\u1e63adr), i.e. the upper side, the\nfirst part, of such nights is dark, covered by a garment, so that only\nthe uncovered lower side or end is visible. In the cosmogony of\nMohammedan legends, Night is represented as a _curtain_, \u1e25ij\u00e2b.[529]\n\nThe clothing of the Night is of black colour, leyl\u00e2 \u1e25\u00e2likat al-jilb\u00e2b,\nas is said in Arabic,[530] (compare \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cd\u03be[531]), a \u2018pitchy\nmantle,\u2019 as Shakespeare says,\n\n The day begins to break, and night is fled\n Whose pitchy mantle overveil\u2019d the earth.\n _King Henry VI._ First Part, II. 2.[532]\n\nAnd in Arabic poetry also we meet with night described as a \u2018pitchy\nmantle.\u2019 For the poet Ab\u00fb-l-Shibl says in a remarkable elegy[533]:\n\n Shamsun ka\u02beanna-\u1e93-\u1e93al\u00e2ma albasah\u00e2 * thauban min-az-zifti au min-al-\u1e33\u00eer\u00ee\n A sun, as if darkness had clothed him\n With a garment of resin or pitch.\n\nThe darker the Night, the thicker is the black cloak with which it is\nprovided. Even modern languages have expressions like _thick_ darkness\n(Hungarian _vastag set\u00e9ts\u00e9g_); in Arabic a very dark night is called a\nnight with a heavy covering, leyl murjahinn.[534]\n\nThe name L\u00f4\u1e6d, accordingly, signifies, like the Hellenic female forms\nKalyke, Kalypso (from \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9), the _Covering Night_. It is very\nsignificant of the Night that the Greek figures are represented as\nweaving clothes for the Thunderer:[535] they weave the cloak with which\nthey cover over the world when they spread darkness over it. Surely no\none will after all this doubt that the name Lot is a designation of the\nCovering Night. Should this be still doubtful, perhaps the following\nfact from the domain of the Arabic language may bring conviction.\nEveryone knows the Arabic word k\u00e2fir, at least in its usual meaning of\nInfidel. Even the earlier Arabian philologians, who, notwithstanding\nfrequent amusing whims and hobbies, often exhibit a fine feeling and\nvery sober judgment as to etymology, said that this word received the\nmeaning Infidel only through the dogmatism of Isl\u00e2m, that it originally\ndenoted the _Coverer_, and that the transition of meaning was founded on\nthe idea that the Infidel covers up God\u2019s omnipotence. Similarly in\nHebrew the verb k\u00e2phar is said of God when he _forgives_ (i.e. covers)\nthe sins of men; in Arabic \u0121afar.[536] In Arabic the Unthankful is also\na k\u00e2fir, a \u2018Coverer,\u2019 since he _covers_ the blessings he has received:\nand in late Hebrew he is similarly termed keph\u00fby \u1e6d\u00f4bh\u00e2 \u2018one who covers\nup the good.\u2019[537] In short, the k\u00e2fir is properly the Coverer. Now the\ndarkness of night is called k\u00e2fir by old Arabian poets. We have already\n(in the Tenth Section of this chapter, p. 134), quoted for another\npurpose the verse of the poet of the tribe M\u00e2zin: \u2018The Shining one\nstretches his right hand towards him who _covers up_,\u2019 where the latter\nis k\u00e2fir, the Night. The celebrated poet Leb\u00eed, too, says in his\nprize-poem (Mu\u02bfalla\u1e33\u00e2, v. 65): \u2018Until the stars stretch out their hands\ntowards the k\u00e2fir, and the weaknesses of the boundaries are covered over\nby their darkness,\u2019\n\n \u1e24atta i\u1e0f\u00e2 al\u1e33at yadan f\u00ee k\u00e2firin * wa\u02beajanna \u02bfaur\u00e2ti-th-thu\u0121\u00fbri\n \u1e93al\u00e2muh\u00e2.\n\nAnd the poet al-\u1e24umeyd says, \u2018They (the camels) go to water before the\nbreaking of the morning, whilst the son of splendour (the dawn) is still\n_hiding in the cloak_,\u2019 i.e. before it is yet day,\n\n Fawaradat \u1e33abla-nbil\u00e2ji-l-fajri * wabnu \u1e0fuk\u00e2\u02bea _k\u00e2minun f\u00ee kafri_.[538]\n\nA very witty use of the application of the epithet _k\u00e2fir_ to the Night\nis make by the poet Beh\u00e2 al-D\u00een Zuheyr. He would fain prolong the\nduration of the night, which passes away far too soon for all the\npleasures that it brings him in the midst of a merry circle, and so he\nsays: \u2018To me is due from thee the reward of a Champion of the Faith [in\nbattle against the infidels], if it is true that Night is a _k\u00e2fir_ (an\ninfidel, properly a \u2018coverer\u2019),\n\n L\u00ee f\u00eeka ajru muj\u00e2hidin * in \u1e63a\u1e25\u1e25a anna-l-leyla k\u00e2fir.[539]\n\nAs the Darkness of night is what covers over and hides, so on the other\nhand the Dawn, or the Sun in general, is that which uncovers and\ndiscloses. We have met with this conception before in the case of Noah\n(p. 131). In Arabic safara or asfara is said of the _uncovering_ of any\nconcealed object, and the same words are used of the breaking-forth of\nthe morning sun. There is no doubt that this latter usage is deduced\nfrom the signification \u2018to reveal, uncover;\u2019 the instance quoted in the\nlexicons, \u2018The night which removes the cover from the morning of the\nFriday\u2019 (yusfir \u02bfan), i.e. which precedes Friday, shews by the\npreposition \u02bf_an_ that \u2018to uncover\u2019 is the fundamental signification.\nThus the Arabic etymologists whom I mentioned in a former work[540] may\nbe right in a certain sense in tracing back most of the derivations of\nthe root safar to this sense. But in Egyptian and in the Arabic of the\ndesert the word al-sufr\u00e2 denotes the Sunset, the reason of which is by\nno means clear.[541] No doubt can now be entertained that our Lot is\nidentical with his namesake the Arabic K\u00e2fir the Concealer, the Covering\nNight. Now we can consider the myth. \u2018The daughters of Night form a\nsexual connexion with their father.\u2019 When the evening glow, which is a\ndaughter of the Night (for, as we have seen, the myth identifies the\nmorning and the evening glow), unites with the shades of night and\nbecomes darker and dimmer, so as at length to lose itself in the night,\nthe myth-creators said, \u2018The daughters of Lot, the Coverer, are going to\nbed with their father.\u2019 From the bright, lively character, which the\nmyth must have attributed to the Glow in comparison with the dark, heavy\nNight, they would naturally regard the aged Lot as the victim of an\nintrigue of his lustful daughters; whereas in the Aryan myth it is\nPraj\u00e2pati who uses force against his daughter Ushas. The names of Lot\u2019s\ndaughters are not given in the Old Testament; but we know them from\nanother source. The Arabic legend in which the story of Lot,\ncommunicated by Jews, likewise finds a place, tells us their names. It\nis scarcely credible that these are pure inventions of the Arabs; it is\nmuch more probable that they received them, as they did much else, from\nthe traditions of the Jews. But the Jewish tradition itself has lost the\nnames, as it has lost much else that was not written down. In the Arabic\nstatements, however, there occur such various versions of the names as\nto show clearly that they are instances of the corruption by which\nforeign names are constantly ruined beyond recognition in Arabic\nmanuscripts. One version gives Rayya as the name of the elder, Zo\u0121ar as\nthat of the younger (see Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 933. 22, 934. 16); and from the\nlatter a town is said to be named, which is mentioned in some ancient\nArabic poems. Ibn Badr\u00fbn (ed. Dozy, p. 8) calls them something like\nRasha and Ra\u02bf\u00fbsha (or Ra\u02bfvasha?); Mas\u02bf\u00fbd\u00ee (_Prairies d\u2019or_, II. 193)\nZaha and Ra\u02bfva. Among these differing forms, every one of which is\nprobably based on a corrupt text, Zaha is the only one that may confirm\nthe solar character of Lot\u2019s daughters in the myth. But I think the myth\nof Lot is clear enough in itself to dispense with any such problematic\nconfirmation.\n\nIf the conception of Ker\u00fbbh\u00eem (Cherubim) is native to the Hebrews, and\nnot borrowed at a later period from foreign parts\u2014a question which must\nbe regarded as still an open one\u2014then we may find here also the\n_Coverer_ (compare ker\u00fbbh has-s\u00f4kh\u00eakh \u2018the cherub that covereth,\u2019 Ezek.\nXXVIII. 14), the covering cloud; and hence may be derived the function\nof concealing and covering which was given to the cherubim in the later\nceremonial, as also their connexion with the curtains.[542] \u2018Jahveh\nrides on the Cherub,\u2019 says one of the later religious poets (2 Sam.\nXXII. 11), \u2018and appears on the wings of the wind; he makes darkness\nround about him, tents, collections of water, gloomy clouds.\u2019 Here the\ndark overclouded rainy sky is described; and when Jahveh sends rain over\nthe earth, he rides on the Cherub, and \u2018mists are beneath his feet,\u2019 and\nthe dust which he turns up while riding, forms the shech\u00e2\u1e33\u00eem (properly\nthe dust), the overcast sky. Jahveh is described in other passages also\nas riding on clouds (Is. XIX. 1). Accordingly ker\u00fbbh would originally\ndenote the covering cloud, and whatever is connected with the Cherubim\nin later theological conceptions would be a transformation of ancient\nmythological ideas.[543] Now the root _krb_ is used in Himyarite\ninscriptions in titles of kings, as Mukrib Saba, or Tobba\u02bf ker\u00eeb, i.e.\nas Von Kremer explains them,[544] \u2018_Protector_ of Saba,\u2019 \u2018_Protecting_\nTobba\u02bf.\u2019 This is easily explained by the fact that in the Semitic\nlanguages words signifying \u2018to protect\u2019 are often derived from the\nfundamental idea of \u2018covering.\u2019 \u2018The Cherubim spread forth their wings\u2019\n(1 Kings VIII. 7), i.e. they cover. To spread out the wings (ken\u00e2phay\u00eem)\nover some one is in Biblical language the usual expression for the\nprotection which is allotted to him. In Arabic the same word (kanaf)\nsignifies not only a bird\u2019s wing, but also concealment, shade (compare\nPs. XCI. 1\u20134), and protection.[545]\n\nThe opinion that the Cherubim were borrowed from foreign parts is\naccordingly much less probable than that which maintains that they\noriginated with the Hebrews;[546] and the latter view receives further\nsupport from the fact that the Cherubim can be easily fitted without any\nviolence into the system of Hebrew mythology. It is again supported by\nthe connexion between Cherubim and Seraphim, the latter of which are\noriginally Hebrew. This connexion agrees moreover with the results of\nour mythological researches. As Ker\u00fbbh as \u2018Coverer\u2019 belongs to the dark\ncloudy sky, so the Ser\u00e2ph\u00eem must be a mythological conception pertaining\nto the same series, if we adopt the correct interpretation of them as\n_Dragons_,[547] and remember the mythological meaning of serpents and\ndragons (_supra_, p. 27, 184, _sq._). It then becomes probable that the\ntheological significance of Cherubim and Seraphim belongs to the remains\nof the very earliest form of Hebrew religion, and approximates to the\nfacts of which I shall speak at Chapter VI. \u00a7 5, pp. 224, 5.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 244:\n\n Osiander (_Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, 1853, VII. 437) is inclined to\n combine with this the old Arabic _Ray\u00e2m_ or _Riy\u00e2m_.\n\nFootnote 245:\n\n The added Abh in Abhr\u00e2m, compared with the other expressions in which\n the quality of _father_ is not emphasized, finds an exact parallel in\n \u0394\u03b7 ( = \u0393\u03b7)-\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1 and \u0393\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 246:\n\n _Opuscula Arabica_ (ed. W. Wright, Leyden 1859), p. 30. 2; 34. 5. This\n usage is made possible by the signification _Cloud_, which is peculiar\n to the word sam\u00e2 in Arabic (Sprenger, _Das Leben und die Lehre des\n Mohammed_, I. 544).\n\nFootnote 247:\n\n Schweinfurth, _The Heart of Africa_, I. 311.\n\nFootnote 248:\n\n See the Count von Baudissin, _Studien zur semitischen\n Religionsgeschichte_, Leipzig 1876, I. p. 306 _et seqq._\n\nFootnote 249:\n\n Or Future, or Imperfect, as it is more generally termed.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 250:\n\n It is worthy of note that in Arabic _pluralia fracta_ can be formed\n from this class of proper names. An interesting example of this is\n Tan\u02bfum^u b. \u1e32ami\u02beata, the name of the ancestor of the tribe Tan\u00e2\u02bfum.\n See Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-ishti\u1e33\u00e2\u1e33_, p. 85 and gloss _h_.\n\nFootnote 251:\n\n Strictly the Dawn.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 252:\n\n This theory explains the connexion of \u1e63\u00e2rach with z\u00e2rach \u2018to be\n bright.\u2019 Accordingly, I should like to place the Hebrew \u1e63\u00e2ra\u02bfath\n _lepra_ in this same etymological group, as the relationship between \u05e2\n and \u05d4 does not require demonstration; the signification would then be\n that of \u2018whiteness\u2019 (see Lev. XIII. 3, 4).\n\nFootnote 253:\n\n Hermann V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, _Uigurische Sprachmonumente und das Kudatku Bilik_,\n Innsbruck 1870, p. 238 _a_.\n\nFootnote 254:\n\n E.g. vol. IV. 26 ult.; XVIII. 3, 11. 19, 93. 11; XXV. 5. 12, 6. 6 &c.\n I always quote the octavo edition of the _Romance of \u02bfAntar_, printed\n by Sheikh Sh\u00e2h\u00een in thirty-two small vols., Cairo 1286.\n\nFootnote 255:\n\n In De Sacy, _Chrestomathie Arabe_, II. 151. 13.\n\nFootnote 256:\n\n It is entitled _Nuzhat al-asr\u00e2r f\u00ee mu\u1e25\u00e2warat al-leyl w-al-nah\u00e2r_, and\n is in MS. in the University Library at Leipzig: cod. Ref. no. 357,\n fol. 11\u201318.\n\nFootnote 257:\n\n Of this literature I will now draw attention only to a \u1e32as\u00eed\u00e2 of the\n old Persian poet Asad\u00ee, which is now made accessible in the edition of\n R\u00fcckert\u2019s _Grammatik, Poetik und Rhetorik der Perser_, published by\n the care of W. Pertsch, Gotha 1874, pp. 59\u201363. But it contains little\n that harmonises with the argumentation of the above-employed Arabic\n tract.\n\nFootnote 258:\n\n _Nuzhat al-asr\u00e2r_ &c., fol. 14 _verso_, 17 _verso_.\n\nFootnote 259:\n\n E.g. Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2\u2019s Poems in the edition with commentary, B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 1286,\n II. 107, line 1: wa-tabtasimu-l-ashr\u00e2\u1e6du fajran.\n\nFootnote 260:\n\n See Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2, _ibid_., p. 211, line 5: f\u00ee ma\u1e0d\u1e25aki-l-bar\u1e33i.\n\nFootnote 261:\n\n Vol. I. 193. Compare a beautiful passage in a poem of Ibn Mu\u1e6deyr,\n given by N\u00f6ldeke, _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Poesie der alten Araber_, p. 34, to\n which we shall recur farther on.\n\nFootnote 262:\n\n _Ursprung der Mythologie_, p. 109 _et seq_.\n\nFootnote 263:\n\n Most persons know this tense as Future, or as Imperfect.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 264:\n\n Similar correlative names in Hellenic mythology are Pro-metheus and\n Epi-metheus.\n\nFootnote 265:\n\n Muslim\u2019s _Collection of Traditions_, edition with Commentary, Cairo\n 1284, V. 118. The commentator, Al-Nawaw\u00ee, puts the name al-\u02bf\u00c2\u1e33ib in\n combination with another name of the Prophet of identical meaning,\n viz. al-Mu\u1e33f\u00ee. The name al-\u02bf\u00c2\u1e33ib occurs elsewhere also as a proper\n name, e.g. as the name of a friend of the poet al-A\u02bfsha (_Kit\u00e2b\n al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, VI. 73).\n\nFootnote 266:\n\n _Sh\u00e2hn\u00e2meh_, ed. Mohl, VII. v. 633, according to R\u00fcckert\u2019s ingenious\n interpretation in the _Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, 1856, X. 145.\n\nFootnote 267:\n\n _De Principiis_, ed. Kopp, p. 385.\n\nFootnote 268:\n\n The sun itself is called a golden egg (Ad. Kuhn, _Zeitschr. f\u00fcr vergl.\n Sprachforschung_, I. 456).\n\nFootnote 269:\n\n _King Henry VI._, Part II. Act IV. beginning.\n\nFootnote 270:\n\n Heinrich Heine, _The Baltic_ [_sic!_ i.e. \u2018die Nordsee\u2019 = the German\n Ocean], Part 2, No. 4 in E.A. Bowring\u2019s translation.\n\nFootnote 271:\n\n In Henne-am-Rhyn, _Die deutsche Volkssage_, Leipzig 1874, p. 292, No.\n 544.\n\nFootnote 272:\n\n Catullus, LIX. [LXI.] vv. 84\u201386.\n\nFootnote 273:\n\n Em\u00eer Chosrev of Delhi, in R\u00fcckert, _Grammatik, Rhetorik und Poetik der\n Perser_, p. 69. 6.\n\nFootnote 274:\n\n See Excursus C.\n\nFootnote 275:\n\n Pauly, _Realencyklop\u00e4die_, VII. 1277; Wilhelm Bacher, Ni\u1e93\u00e2m\u00ee\u2019s _Leben\n und Werke_, Leipzig 1871, p. 97, note 13.\n\nFootnote 276:\n\n Al-Bei\u1e0d\u00e2w\u00ee, _Commentarius in Coranum_, ed. Fleischer, I. 572. 17.\n Bacher, _l.c._\n\nFootnote 277:\n\n Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, II. 170.\n\nFootnote 278:\n\n See Excursus D.\n\nFootnote 279:\n\n See e.g. Brugsch, _Histoire d\u2019\u00c9gypte_, 1st ed., I. 37.\n\nFootnote 280:\n\n _De Osir. et Isid._, c. XXXIV.\n\nFootnote 281:\n\n _De Pythiae oraculis_, c. XII., and compare the pseudo-Plutarch, _De\n vita et po\u00ebsi Homeri_, c. CIV.\n\nFootnote 282:\n\n So says Yal\u1e33\u00fb\u1e6d. Sh\u00f4ch\u00ear \u1e6c\u00f4bh has the reading Akram\u00e2nia, which is\n difficult of identification (Germania?).\n\nFootnote 283:\n\n Yal\u1e33\u00fb\u1e6d and Sh\u00f4ch\u00ear \u1e6c\u00f4bh on Ps. XIX. 7.\n\nFootnote 284:\n\n _Ursprung der Mythologie_, p. 273.\n\nFootnote 285:\n\n See p. 15.\n\nFootnote 286:\n\n Compare Eckhel, _Doctrina Nummorum veterum_, V. 15.\n\nFootnote 287:\n\n _Die Religion der R\u00f6mer_, Erlangen 1836, II. 218. Compare Mommsen,\n _History of Rome_ (translation), I. 185, ed. of 1868.\n\nFootnote 288:\n\n Fr. Lenormant, _Les premi\u00e8res civilisations_, Paris 1874, II. 29\u201331.\n\nFootnote 289:\n\n It is well known that the story of Jonah was long ago connected with\n the myth of Herakles and Hesione, or that of Perseus and Andromeda\n (Bleek, _Einleitung ins A. T._, Berlin 1870, p. 577). Tylor,\n _Primitive Culture_, I. 306, should also be consulted. What Emil\n Burnouf says in his _La Science des Religions_, Paris 1872, p. 263, is\n quite untenable; he finds in the myth \u2018un image de la naissance du feu\n divin et de la vie dont il est le principe.\u2019\n\nFootnote 290:\n\n Nonnus, _Dionysiaca_ XL. 443; Movers, _Religion der Ph\u00f6nizier_, p.\n 394.\n\nFootnote 291:\n\n Aesch., _Prom._, vv. 505, 467, Dind. I must also refer to Tangaloa,\n the chief figure in the Polynesian mythology, who is described as the\n first navigator. This characteristic, and the fact that Tangaloa is\n regarded as the originator of every handicraft (see the chapter on the\n Myth of Civilisation), with other features on which Schirren lays\n stress in determining his nature, seem to claim for him a solar\n character. Gerland (_Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, VI. 242) disputes\n this interpretation.\n\nFootnote 292:\n\n _Jahrb\u00fccher f\u00fcr die bibl._ Wissenschaft, X. 21; _History of Israel_,\n I. 265 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 293:\n\n In his essay _Ph\u00f6nikische Analekten, in the Zeitschr. der D. M. G._,\n 1865, XIX. 536.\n\nFootnote 294:\n\n Sepp, _Jerusalem und das Heilige Land_, Schaffhausen 1863, II. 687.\n\nFootnote 295:\n\n _Vergelijkende geschiedenis van de egyptische en mesopotamische\n Godsdiensten_, Amsterdam 1872, p. 434.\n\nFootnote 296:\n\n Julius Braun, _Naturgeschichte der Sage_, I. 41. See Tylor, _Primitive\n Culture_, I. 316.\n\nFootnote 297:\n\n E. Jacques, _Vocabulaire Arabe-malacassa_, in _Journ. Asiat._, 1833,\n XI. 129, 130.\n\nFootnote 298:\n\n Gerland, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, VI. 242.\n\nFootnote 299:\n\n \u2018Wimpern der Morgenr\u00f6the,\u2019 and so Ewald translates aph\u02bfappayim in Job,\n i.e. eyelashes, _eyelids_ being \u2018Augenlieder.\u2019 Yet Gesenius\n understands the word as _palpebrae_, i.e. eyelids (though both this\n word and _cilium_ are occasionally used indiscriminately in either\n sense). \u0392\u03bb\u03ad\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd is only \u2018eyelid;\u2019 the Arabic \u1e25aw\u00e2jib is only\n \u2018eyelash.\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 300:\n\n Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 1003. _a_; compare Orph. VIII. I. 13. In the\n _Thesmophoriazusae_ v. 17, Aristophanes makes Euripides call the eye\n \u2018the imitation of the disc of the sun;\u2019 compare _Acharn_. v. 1184: \u1f66\n \u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u1f44\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1, \u2018O glorious eye!\u2019 as an address to the Sun.\n\nFootnote 301:\n\n Al Buch\u00e2r\u00ee, IX. 30, 35.\n\nFootnote 302:\n\n _Ya\u00e7na_, I. 35, III. 49.\n\nFootnote 303:\n\n Eberh. Schrader, _Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament_, p. 165.\n\nFootnote 304:\n\n Haneberg, _Religi\u00f6se Alterth\u00fcmer der Bibel_, M\u00fcnich 1869, p. 49;\n Movers, _Die Ph\u00f6nizier_, I. 411, where other combinations are given.\n\nFootnote 305:\n\n The seven days of the week are imagined to have a connexion with the\n sun. According to Diodorus, I. 272, the inhabitants of Rhodes at the\n time of Cadmus worshipped the Sun-god, who had begotten seven sons on\n that island.\n\nFootnote 306:\n\n Muir, _Sanskrit Texts_, V. 64.\n\nFootnote 307:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fb\u1e6d, _Geogr. W\u00f6rterb._, III. 762.\n\nFootnote 308:\n\n See Excursus E.\n\nFootnote 309:\n\n Hartung, _Religion und Mythologie der Griechen_, Leipzig 1865, II.\n 87\u201394.\n\nFootnote 310:\n\n _al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee Majma\u02be al-amth\u00e2l_, II. 111. 21.\n\nFootnote 311:\n\n Wa-k\u00e2n auwal m\u00e2 asbal al-leyl riw\u00e2\u1e33ah wa-\u1e33ad iswadd al-\u1e93al\u00e2m\n bia\u0121-s\u00e2\u1e33ah, _Romance of \u02bfAntar_, V. 170. 17. Accordingly, insadal is\n said of night as well as of a tent, e.g. _\u02bfAntar_, VI. 60. 14, 95. 5.\n\nFootnote 312:\n\n I wish to mention here a suggestion received in a letter from Prof. de\n Goeje of Leyden, to take the name Hebhel in the appellative sense\n \u2018herdsman,\u2019 and compare it with the Arabic abil, the initial breathing\n being aspirated. The Hebrew \u00e2bh\u00eal, \u2018pasture,\u2019 would then belong to the\n same group. But see also on the latter word an ingenious conjecture of\n Derenbourg in the _Journal Asiatique_, 1867, vol. I. p. 93.\n\nFootnote 313:\n\n Wa-leylatun \u1e6dachy\u00e2\u02beu yarma\u02bfillu * f\u00eeh\u00e2 \u02bfala-l-sh\u00e2r\u00ee nadan much\u1e0dallu,\n _MS. of Univ. Leyden, Cod. Warner_, No. 597, p. 345.\n\nFootnote 314:\n\n See above, pp. 42, 43.\n\nFootnote 315:\n\n _Die Genesis_, Leipzig 1860, p. 64.\n\nFootnote 316:\n\n Levy, in the _Zeitschr. der D. M. G._, 1860, XIV. 404.\n\nFootnote 317:\n\n Compare Gelpke\u2019s article _Neutestamentliche Studien_, in the _Theo.\n Studien u. Kritiken_, 1849, pp. 639 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 318:\n\n See Excursus F.\n\nFootnote 319:\n\n _Premi\u00e8res Civilisations_, II. 81.\n\nFootnote 320:\n\n We do not wish to overlook the fact that the word \u1e32ayn in Himyaritic\n is a name of dignity, like Prince, Ruler, Lord, and may therefore, if\n this signification is adopted, be a synonym for Ba\u02bfal. See Pr\u00e6torius\n in the _Zeitschr. der D. M. G._, 1872, XXVI. 432.\n\nFootnote 321:\n\n See Fleischer\u2019s _Nachtr\u00e4gliches_ to Levy\u2019s _Chald. W\u00f6rterb. \u00fcber d.\n Targ._, II. 577. _b_.\n\nFootnote 322:\n\n _Ya\u00e7na_, I. 35, XVII. 22; _Khordavesta_, III. 49, VII. 4; Spiegel,\n _Die heiligen Schriften der Parsen_, III. 27: \u2018The beautiful Dawn we\n praise; the brilliant, endowed with brilliant horses, who remembers\n men, remembers heroes, and is provided with splendour, with dwellings.\n The morning Dawn we praise; the cheering, endowed with fast horses.\u2019\n _Vendidad_, XXI. 20: \u2018Rise up, O splendid Sun! with thy fast horses,\n and shine on the creatures.\u2019 In the Sun\u2019s Yast (it is the sixth), in\n almost every verse from the invocation to the end of the prayer, this\n epithet is applied to the Sun; and in the tenth Yast chariots and\n flaming horses are assigned to Mithra (see the references in Spiegel,\n _l. c._ III. xxv.).\n\nFootnote 323:\n\n A rough imitation of:\n\n Ph\u00f6bus in der Sonnendroschke\n Peitschte seine Flammenrosse.\n _Atta Troll_, XXII. 1.\n\nFootnote 324:\n\n Schwartz, _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, pp. 106\u2013109.\n\nFootnote 325:\n\n According to Rawlinson this conception came from the Assyrians to the\n Persians. Put the learned explorer of Assyrian antiquity seems to\n ignore the solar significance of the winged disc when he says: \u2018The\n conjecture is probable that ... the wings signify Omnipresence and the\n circle Eternity\u2019 (_History of Herodotus_, note to I. c. 135, I. 215 of\n the edition of 1862).\n\nFootnote 326:\n\n Hebrew scholars will observe that I here abandon the usual\n interpretation, and understand eshken\u00e2 in the second member of the\n setting of the sun. In this way the first member speaks of the rising,\n the second of the setting of the sun (= b\u00e2 hash-shemesh), which dips\n into the water at the further edge (horizon) of the sea (achar\u00eeth\n y\u00e2m).\n\nFootnote 327:\n\n See Excursus G.\n\nFootnote 328:\n\n _Iliad_, VIII. 485. See Plutarch, _De vita et poes. Hom._, c. CIII.\n\nFootnote 329:\n\n E.g. al-Suyt\u00fb\u1e6di in the _\u1e24usn al-mu\u1e25\u00e2\u1e0dar\u00e2_, &c: \u2018fa i\u1e0f\u00e2 acha\u1e0fat\n f\u00ee-l-hub\u00fbt\u2019 (ap. Weyer\u2019s _Diss. de loco Ibn Khacanis de Ibn Zeidun_,\n p. 87, n. 82).\n\nFootnote 330:\n\n The Sun is in all the Semitic as well as in many Aryan languages\n grammatically feminine, and the myths frequently assign to the Sun a\n female form. It is therefore necessary sometimes to use the feminine\n pronoun.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 331:\n\n In Ahlwardt, _Chalaf al-a\u1e25mar_, p. 49. I. See _Vita Timuri_, II. 48:\n \u2018\u1e33ad jana\u1e25at al shams lil-\u0121ur\u00fbb.\u2019\n\nFootnote 332:\n\n Compare Ps. XVII. 8, LXI. 5 [4]; and accordingly in tast\u00eer\u00eam bes\u00eather\n p\u00e2nekh\u00e2, Ps. XXXI. 21 [20], \u2018thou hidest them in the hiding-place of\n thy _face_,\u2019 we must emend p\u00e2nekh\u00e2 \u2018face,\u2019 into ken\u00e2phekh\u00e2 \u2018wings.\u2019\n\nFootnote 333:\n\n _Romance of \u02bfAntar_, V. 136 ult., 236 penult. In the Babylonian epos\n of _Istar\u2019s Descent to Hell_, v. 10 (Lenormant, _Premi\u00e8res\n Civilisations_, II. 85), Night is compared to a bird.\n\nFootnote 334:\n\n This interpretation, here erroneously employed, is occasioned by the\n fact that in the Semitic languages the notion of \u2018part\u2019 is conveyed by\n words which properly denote \u2018side:\u2019 the two sides of a thing are two\n parts of it. Thus, even in literary Arabic the word \u1e6daraf, and in\n vulgar Arabic the word j\u00e2nib (which is etymologically connected with\n the Hebrew k\u00e2n\u00e2ph \u2018wing\u2019) are used quite in the sense of ba\u02bf\u1e0d \u2018a\n part.\u2019 An interesting modern example of this lies before me in the\n Arabic text of the terms of the latest 5,000,000_l._ loan by the\n Egyptian Minister of Finance, in which the third article says: 'The\n shares fall under the ordinary laws regulating buying and selling and\n bequest\u2014saw\u00e2\u02bean k\u00e2na f\u00ee j\u00e2nib minhu au f\u00eehi bil-k\u00e2mil\u2014equally whether\n it concerns a portion of them or the whole' (_al-Jaw\u00e2\u02be\u00efb_, a weekly\n paper, XIV. No. 695, p. 2, c. 2, of the year 1291).\n\nFootnote 335:\n\n E.g. _Romance of \u02bfAntar_, V. 80 ult., 168 v. 6: Saar\u1e25alu \u02bfankum l\u00e2\n ur\u00eedu saw\u00e2\u02beakum * wa\u02bea\u1e33\u1e63idukum f\u00ee jun\u1e25i kulli \u1e93al\u00e2min \u2018I go away from\n you, I want not the like of you; but I shall seek you under the wings\n of all darkness.\u2019\n\nFootnote 336:\n\n _al-A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, II. 12. 3, is also noticeable: \u2018\u1e33amrun tawassa\u1e6du jun\u1e25a\n leylin mubridi.\u2019\n\nFootnote 337:\n\n _Deutsche Mythologie_, p. 141.\n\nFootnote 338:\n\n Ebers, _Aegypten und die B\u00fccher Mosis_, p. 70.\n\nFootnote 339:\n\n Fiske, _Myths and Myth-Makers_, pp. 71, 154.\n\nFootnote 340:\n\n The sun is called _celer deus_ by Ovid, _Fasti_, I. 386; and\n Herodotus, I. 215, says: \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c7\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. See Hehn,\n _Culturpflanzen_, etc., p. 38.\n\nFootnote 341:\n\n _Ber\u00eash\u00eeth rabb\u00e2_, sect. 22.\n\nFootnote 342:\n\n Even Philo lays the chief momentum of the story of Hagar on her\n flight: \u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 (sc. \u1f41 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2) \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f0c\u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (_De profugis_, p. 546, ed. Mangey).\n\nFootnote 343:\n\n I leave it for the present undecided whether the name Terach, given to\n Abraham\u2019s father, belongs to this class. Ewald (_History of Israel_,\n I. 274) puts it in connexion with \u00e2rach \u2018to wander,\u2019 though in an\n ethnological sense.\n\nFootnote 344:\n\n See above, p. 41.\n\nFootnote 345:\n\n The first to discover this origin of the relative asher was the\n Hungarian Csepregi, pupil of the great Schultens, _Dissert._, Lugd.,\n p. 171 (quoted by Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 165): he did not, however,\n follow out the idea very clearly. Compare also Stade\u2019s view,\n essentially the same, in the _Morgenl\u00e4ndische Forschungen_, Leipzig\n 1875, p. 188; I could not get a sight of this till after the above was\n ready for the press. On the other side Schrader, _Jen. Literaturzeit_\n 1875, p. 299.\n\nFootnote 346:\n\n In Assyrian the Moon is called ar\u1e25u, with a mere hamz\u00e2 (Schrader,\n _Assyr.-babyl. Keilinschr._, p. 282). In Arabic the reverse has\n happened; from warch (y\u00e2r\u00eaach) has been formed the verb arracha \u2018to\n fix the time (by the lunar calendar), to date,\u2019 the _w_ (Heb. _y_)\n being weakened into hamz\u00e2 (aleph). Whether the Coptic Ioh and Arabic\n y\u00fb\u1e25 are connected with y\u00e2r\u00eaach (the abrasion of _r_ is not uncommon),\n is another question.\n\nFootnote 347:\n\n So B\u00f6ttcher, _Ausf\u00fchrl. Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache_, I. 516\u201317.\n\nFootnote 348:\n\n The poet D\u00eek al-Jinn had a mistress named D\u00een\u00e2 (Ibn Challi\u1e33\u00e2n. ed.\n W\u00fcstenfeld, IV. 96. 7). See also Ab\u00fb \u02bfUyeyn\u00e2 al-Muhallab\u00ee (_Ag\u00e2n\u00ee_,\n III. 128. 2, 6).\n\nFootnote 349:\n\n Edwin Norris, _Assyrian Dictionary_, I. 248.\n\nFootnote 350:\n\n We find also al-\u02bfulya opposed to al-dunya in Ibn Ch\u00e2\u1e33\u00e2n \u1e33al\u00e2\u02be\u00efd\n al-\u02bfi\u1e33y\u00e2n, ed. B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 1284, p. 60 ult.: \u2018wa-d\u00e2mat laka-d-dunya *\n wa-d\u00e2mat laka-l-\u02bfulya.\u2019\n\nFootnote 351:\n\n Cod. Leyden, Warner\u2019s Fund, No. 597, p. 325.\n\nFootnote 352:\n\n It also deserves consideration whether D\u00een\u00e2 as the feminine of D\u00e2n\n denotes the Moon: compare L\u00e2bh\u00e2n, Lebh\u00e2n\u00e2; \u00c2sh\u00ear, Ash\u00ear\u00e2. In that case\n the above myth would speak of the abduction of the Moon by the\n Morning-dawn, i.e. the disappearance of the moon at sunrise. It would\n then be the same myth as the Hellenic one of the abduction of Helen\u00ea\n (Sel\u00ean\u00ea) by Paris.\n\nFootnote 353:\n\n Angelo de Gubernatis, _ibid._ p. 278 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 354:\n\n See _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._, 1855, IX. 758.\n\nFootnote 355:\n\n Edwin Norris, _Assyrian Dictionary_, I. 347. The signification \u2018having\n locks\u2019 might also be mentioned as a possibility for zal\u00eech\u00e2. In that\n case we should have to notice the Syrian zel\u00eech\u00ea of the Peshi\u1e6dt\u00f4 in\n _Song of Songs_, I. 11, where the parallelism to ged\u00fbl\u00ea demands\n something like \u2018locks of hair;\u2019 and this meaning agrees with that of\n zelach in Syriac: _fudit._\n\nFootnote 356:\n\n It is well-known that the gutturals \u062d \u1e25 and \u062e ch often change into \u0641\n f. The Arabic \u1e33ada\u1e25 \u2018cup\u2019 becomes in Turkish \u1e33adef; the name Yeh\u00fbd is\n pronounced in jest _Jufut_. Compare the Arabic na\u1e33acha with na\u1e33afa,\n and the Mehri eh\u00fb, denoting \u2018mouth,\u2019 with Arabic f\u00fb, Hebrew peh, etc.\n\nFootnote 357:\n\n See _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._, 1855, IX. 758.\n\nFootnote 358:\n\n See Pfleiderer, _Religion und ihre Geschichte_, II. 271.\n\nFootnote 359:\n\n Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, pp. 159 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 360:\n\n 2 Kings, I. 8, II. 11. Compare the fiery, flame-red chariot of Ushas\n (_Rigveda_, VI. 64. 7).\n\nFootnote 361:\n\n _Das alte Griechenland im neuen_, p. 23.\n\nFootnote 362:\n\n Supplement to the Augsburg _Allgem. Zeitung_, 1874, No. 344. p. 5377.\n\nFootnote 363:\n\n Compare Renan, _Hist. g\u00e9n\u00e9r. des Langues s\u00e9mitiques_, p. 28.\n\nFootnote 364:\n\n Called in the English Bible Lamech, which is derived from the pausal\n form L\u00e2m\u0115kh through the LXX. \u039b\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c7, as is the case with many names,\n e.g. Abel, Japheth, Jared, though not all; cf. on the other side\n Jether, Zerah, Peleg. The ordinary form, such as L\u0115m\u0115ch, ought to be\n preferred.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 365:\n\n Schwartz, _Ursprung der Mythologie_, pp. 138\u2013150.\n\nFootnote 366:\n\n See the whole of Chapter VI.\n\nFootnote 367:\n\n See note 364, p. 129:.\n\nFootnote 368:\n\n Ps. XIX. 5 [4]. We have already remarked (p. 111) that the tents which\n originally belonged to the sky at night are frequently transferred to\n the sky of daytime; see also Is. XL. 22. And Noah uncovers himself,\n beth\u00f4kh ohol\u00f4 \u2018in the middle of his tent\u2019 (Gen. IX. 21).\n\nFootnote 369:\n\n In al-Jauhar\u00ee, s.r. _kfr_.\n\nFootnote 370:\n\n In Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 193; \u1e25atta ara a\u02bfn\u00e2\u1e33a \u1e63ub\u1e25in ablaj\u00e2 * tas\u00fbru f\u00ee\n a\u02bfj\u00e2zi leylin ad\u02bfaj\u00e2. The expression a\u02bfj\u00e2z al-leyl also occurs in a\n verse of Farazda\u1e33, _Kit\u00e2b al-A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XIV. 173. 19, and of Ashga\u02bf,\n _ibid._ XVII. 35. 13.\n\nFootnote 371:\n\n See also _Sh\u00e2hn\u00e2m\u00eah_, VII. 395, with R\u00fcckert\u2019s conjecture suggested in\n _Zeitsch. der D. M. G.,_ 1856, X. 136.\n\nFootnote 372:\n\n Lazarus Geiger, _Ursprung und Entwickelung der menschl_. _Sprache und\n Vernunft_, I. 447.\n\nFootnote 373:\n\n Schwartz, _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, p. 228.\n\nFootnote 374:\n\n In G. Rawlinson\u2019s _History of Herodotus_, I. 490 _et seq._ One might\n also think of the Arabic nafara \u2018to fly.\u2019 The Sun is a _fugitive_, as\n has been already shown.\n\nFootnote 375:\n\n Lenormant, _Premi\u00e8res Civilisations_, II. 21.\n\nFootnote 376:\n\n On the primary signification of the root _mrd_ in Semitic, see Fried.\n Delitzsch, _Studien \u00fcber indogerm.-semit_. _Wurzelverwandtschaft_,\n Leipzig 1873, p. 74.\n\nFootnote 377:\n\n _Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament_, p. 17, and _Die\n assyr.-babyl_. _Keilinschriften_, p. 212. Compare Merx, _Grammatica\n Syriaca_, p. 201.\n\nFootnote 378:\n\n Levy, _Ph\u00f6nizische Studien_, pt. II. p. 24.\n\nFootnote 379:\n\n Adolf Jellinek, _B\u00eath ham-midr\u00e2sh_, V. 40; see supra, p. 32.\n\nFootnote 380:\n\n I am fully aware that in Hebrew poetry arrows are frequently, indeed\n most frequently, to be understood of lightning. \u2018He sends out his\n arrows and scatters them; lightnings in great number and discomfits\n them\u2019 (Ps. XVIII. 15 [14]). But the arrows of Joseph\u2019s adversaries\n must from the very nature of the myth be rays of the sun. If the\n hunter is the Sun, then the rays can only be something which the\n hunter in that ancient time used for shooting. Mythology is not the\n product of a well-thought-out consistent system, and so nothing is\n more likely than that two different things should be treated in the\n same way by virtue of some feature common to both. Thus the solar ray\n and the lightning are the same in mythology\u2014an Arrow.\n\nFootnote 381:\n\n See a fuller description in Schwartz, _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, pp.\n 218\u2013220.\n\nFootnote 382:\n\n J.G. M\u00fcller, _Geschichte der amerikanischen Urreligionen_, p. 429.\n\nFootnote 383:\n\n See this question treated and its literature cited in Creuzer,\n _Symbolik und Mythologie_, 3rd ed., I. 57.\n\nFootnote 384:\n\n For the description of the Sun as an Opener, I am enabled to insert a\n supplementary datum, borrowed from a book which was published when p.\n 97 of the present work (to which I refer back) was already printed. In\n a cuneiform Hymn to Samas, the Sun-god, he is addressed thus:\n\n O Samas! from the back of the heavens thou hast come forth:\n _The barrier of the shining heavens thou hast opened;\n Yea the gate of the heavens thou hast opened_.\n\n (German translation of George Smith\u2019s _Chaldean Account of Genesis_,\n with additions by Dr. Fr. Delitzsch, Leipzig, 1876.) The passage\n quoted is one of Delitzsch\u2019s additions, p. 284. I think this Hymn is a\n remarkable illustration of our hypothesis that Yipht\u00e2ch, \u2018the Opener,\u2019\n is a linguistic description of the Sun.\n\nFootnote 385:\n\n I owe to the kindness of my honoured friend Dr. Hampel, Custos of the\n archeological section of the Hungarian National Museum, the\n verification of a reference in the _Bulletino dell\u2019 Instituto di\n Correspondenza Archeologica_, 1853, p. 150, to a stone which exhibits\n the same representation of the head of Janus as the coin in question,\n viz.: \u2018una testa doppia, di cui una facie \u00e8 barbata, l\u2019altra\n giovanile.\u2019\n\nFootnote 386:\n\n See _Naphtali_, discussed in \u00a7 14 of this Chapter; p. 178.\n\nFootnote 387:\n\n Compare _Sol languidus_ (Lucretius, _De rerum nat._, V. 726).\n\nFootnote 388:\n\n The Arabian historians transfer the entire Biblical story of Samson\n (Arabic Shams\u00fbn), to the time of the Mul\u00fbk al-\u1e6daw\u00e2\u02beif; and in their\n narrative the hero fights against R\u00fbm [i.e. the Greek Empire at\n Constantinople]; for the jawbone of an ass is substituted that of a\n camel. See Ibn al-Ath\u00eer al-Ta\u02ber\u00eech al-k\u00e2mil, B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 edition, I. 146.\n\nFootnote 389:\n\n Schwartz, _Ursprung der Mythologie_, p. 144, where Sif and Loki of the\n Scandinavian mythology are also mentioned. The hairiness of the solar\n heroes has been translated into an ethnographical peculiarity in\n modern Greek popular legends. Bernhard Schmidt (_Das Volksleben der\n Neugriechen_, I. 206) says, \u2018In Zante I encountered the idea that the\n entire power of the ancient Greeks lay in three hairs on the breast,\n and vanished if these were cut off, but returned when the hairs grew\n again.\u2019\n\nFootnote 390:\n\n See Ewald, _History of Israel_, I. 345, note 1.\n\nFootnote 391:\n\n In Gen. XXVII. 11, the received punctuation is \u00eesh s\u00e2\u02bf\u00eer.\u2014Tr.\n\nFootnote 392:\n\n Compare Tiele, _Vergel. Geschied._ p. 447.\n\nFootnote 393:\n\n Schwartz, _Ursprung der Mythologie_, p. 146; see above, p. 34.\n\nFootnote 394:\n\n _Zur Entwickelungsgeschichte der Menschheit_, pp. 45\u201360.\u2014_Ursprung und\n Entwickelung der menschlichen Sprache und Vernunft_, Bd. II. book\n 3.\u2014Compare Lazarus, _Leben der Seele_, II. 80; _ibid._ p. 185 note.\n\nFootnote 395:\n\n For _Silver_ the three North-Semitic languages, Assyrian, Aramaic, and\n Hebrew, have the same word, and in so far \u2018form a strict union,\u2019 as\n Schrader says, in opposition to the South-Semitic languages, which\n employ other words for the designation of this metal.'\n _Keilinschriften und das A. T._, p. 46.\n\nFootnote 396:\n\n Ch\u00e2r\u00fb\u1e63 = gold has in recent times been frequently met with on\n Phenician territory, e.g. in the Inscription of Idalion published by\n Euting, II. 1, in the Inscription of Gebal (De Vog\u00fc\u00e9 in the _Journal\n asiat._ 1875, I. 327), and in an unpublished Carthaginian Inscription\n (Derenbourg in _Journal asiat._ 1875, I. 336).\n\nFootnote 397:\n\n The consideration of the Hebrew cheres \u2018Sun\u2019 might suggest that both\n it and the old word for gold (ch\u00e2r\u00fb\u1e63), composed of possibly related\n sounds, both originated in the notion of _shining_.\n\nFootnote 398:\n\n Al-Ma\u1e33\u1e33ar\u00ee, _Analectes_, etc., Leyden edition, I. 369. 3.\n\nFootnote 399:\n\n Al-Jauhar\u00ee, s.r. _kbr._\n\nFootnote 400:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, _Geogr. Dictionary_, II. 609. 8.\n\nFootnote 401:\n\n _Zur himjarischen Alterthumskunde_, in _Zeitsch. der D. M. G._, 1865,\n XIX. 247. Compare Hal\u00e9vy, _Etudes sab\u00e9ennes_, in _Journal asiat._,\n 1874, II. 523.\n\nFootnote 402:\n\n Pseudow\u00e2\u1e33id\u00ee, ed. Nassau Lees, p. 181. 6.\n\nFootnote 403:\n\n _Hist. de l\u2019\u00e9conomie politique en Turquie_, in _Journal asiat._, 1864,\n I. 421. Compare also Sprenger, _Alte Geographie Arabiens_, p. 56.\n\nFootnote 404:\n\n The use of _black_ should also be noticed; dirhem saud\u00e2 and kara\n \u0121urush.\n\nFootnote 405:\n\n In _al-Tha\u02bf\u00e2lib\u00ee_ in the _Zeitsch. der D. M. G._, 1854, VII. 505.\n\nFootnote 406:\n\n _Culturgeschichtliche Streifz\u00fcge_, p. xi.\n\nFootnote 407:\n\n Compare _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, III. 90. 10. Fada\u02bfa bich\u00e2zinihi wa-\u1e33\u00e2la kam f\u00ee beyt\n m\u00e2l\u00ee fa\u1e33\u00e2la lahu min al-wara\u1e33 w-al-\u02bfayn ba\u1e33\u00eeyyatun.\n\nFootnote 408:\n\n Thorbecke, _Antarah, ein vorislamischer Dichter_, Leipzig 1867, p. 41.\n\nFootnote 409:\n\n al-\u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee, Paris edition, 2nd ed., p. 467.\n\nFootnote 410:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XVII. p. 11.\n\nFootnote 411:\n\n M.A. Levy in _Zeitschr. der D. M. G._, 1870, XXIV. p. 191.\n\nFootnote 412:\n\n Hal\u00e9vy, _ibid._ p. 539.\n\nFootnote 413:\n\n Freytag points this word uray\u1e33.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 414:\n\n J. Levy, _Chald\u00e4isches W\u00f6rterbuch_, I. 345.\n\nFootnote 415:\n\n \u2018The Sun had long since in the lap\n Of Thetis taken out his nap;\n And, like a lobster boil\u2019d, the Morn\n From black to red began to turn\u2019\u2014\n\n \u2014says _Hudibras_, canto II.\n\nFootnote 416:\n\n In the Babyl. Talm\u00fbd, Y\u00f4m\u00e2 28. b, the falling of the shades of night\n is described as the time when meshachar\u00ea k\u00f4th\u00e2l\u00ea \u2018the walls are\n black.\u2019\n\nFootnote 417:\n\n Called by Freytag an _eagle_.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 418:\n\n In Har\u00eer\u00ee (Paris edition, 2nd ed.), p. 644. 4, we read of the Dawn:\n \u1e25\u00eena na\u1e63al chi\u1e0d\u00e2b al-\u1e93al\u00e2m \u2018when the dye of darkness was washed off.\u2019\n The Arabic word here used for \u2018dye\u2019 is generally employed of gay\n colours, e.g. al-\u1e25inn\u00e2; but it is self-evident that here only al-ku\u1e25l\n can be meant.\n\nFootnote 419:\n\n In Persian black hair is called m\u00fb i-Zeng\u00ee \u2018Gipsies\u2019 hair,\u2019 and\n zulf-i-Hindu, \u2018Indian hair,\u2019 i.e. black like an Indian\u2019s (e.g.\n R\u00fcckert, _Grammatik, Poetik und Rhetorik der Perser_, p. 287). So in\n the well-known verse of \u1e24afi\u1e93, in which the poet gives away all\n Bochara and Samarkand for the black mole (bech\u00e2l-i-Hinduwesh, \u2018Indian\n mole\u2019) of his Turkish boy (D\u00eew\u00e2n R\u00e2, no. 8. v. 1; ed. Rosenzweig, I.\n 24).\n\nFootnote 420:\n\n _Sa\u1e33t-al-zand_, I. 91. 7.\n\nFootnote 421:\n\n E.g. _Romance of \u02bfAntar_, VII. 115. line 4 from below: wa-kasa-l-leylu\n \u1e25ullat al-saw\u00e2d.\n\nFootnote 422:\n\n Varro treats it as self-evident that \u2018black\u2019 is the most suitable\n epithet for Night, and is thereby tempted to a very curious etymology\n in his work _De ratione vocabulorum_. He explains the word _fur_\n \u2018thief\u2019 by saying that in the old Latin _fur-vum_ was equivalent to\n \u2018black,\u2019 and thieves practise their dark deeds at night. \u2018Sed in\n posteriore ejusdem libri parte docuit (scil. Varro) furem ex eo dictum\n quod veteres Romani furvum atrum appellaverint: at fures per noctem\n quae atra sit facilius furentur\u2019 (Aulus Gellius, _Noctes Atticae_, I.\n 18. 3\u20136).\n\nFootnote 423:\n\n Opuscula arabica, ed. W. Wright, Leyden 1859, p. 30. 11; compare p.\n 31. 12.\n\nFootnote 424:\n\n _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XI. 44.\n\nFootnote 425:\n\n _Ibid._, XVIII. 139.\n\nFootnote 426:\n\n Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 344.\n\nFootnote 427:\n\n Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 345.\n\nFootnote 428:\n\n _I\u1e25y\u00e2 \u02bful\u00fbm al-d\u00een_, II. 148.\n\nFootnote 429:\n\n Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 1183.\n\nFootnote 430:\n\n Chabas, _Etudes sur l\u2019antiquit\u00e9 historique d\u2019apr\u00e8s les sources\n \u00e9gyptiennes_, etc. 2nd edition, Paris 1873, p. 34, where the article\n by Le Page Renouf is referred to.\n\nFootnote 431:\n\n Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 193, whom I follow as a reliable ancient authority;\n al-Jauhar\u00ee and Freytag after him understand a\u1e63ba\u1e25 somewhat\n differently.\n\nFootnote 432:\n\n Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2, II. 107. 3\u20134.\n\nFootnote 433:\n\n _Sa\u1e33t al-zand_, I. 93. 1. These ideas of the relations of colours are\n found expressed with characteristic energy by the eccentric Persian\n poet Ab\u00fb Is\u1e25\u00e2\u1e33 \u1e24all\u00e2j\u00ee; he says, \u2018When the Sun in the blue vault turns\n his cheek into yellow, it makes me think of saffron-coloured viands on\n an azure dish\u2019 (R\u00fcckert, _Grammatik, Poetik und Rhetorik der Perser_,\n p. 126). The conception of turning grey combines that of both\n colours\u2014the white appearing beside the black. According to _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_,\n II. 41. 7; those clouds which combine the two colours are called sh\u00eeb\n \u2018grey\u2019 (al-sa\u1e25\u00e2\u02beib allat\u00ee f\u00eeh\u00e2 saw\u00e2d wa-bay\u00e2d).\n\nFootnote 434:\n\n I will mention here that according to al-\u0120az\u00e2l\u00ee (_I\u1e25j\u00e2_, IV. 433) the\n stars have various colours, some tending towards red, others towards\n white, others towards leaden: wa-tadabbar \u02bfadad kaw\u00e2kibih\u00e2, wachtil\u00e2f\n alw\u00e2nih\u00e2 faba\u02bf\u1e0duh\u00e2 tam\u00eel ila-l-\u1e25umr\u00e2 wa-ba\u02bf\u1e0duh\u00e2 ila-l-bay\u00e2\u1e0d wa-ba\u02bf\u1e0duh\u00e2\n ila launi-r-ru\u1e63\u00e2\u1e63.\n\nFootnote 435:\n\n Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2, I. 195. 1.\n\nFootnote 436:\n\n In Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, IV. 911. 7.\n\nFootnote 437:\n\n \u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee\u2019s _Ma\u1e33\u00e2m\u00e2s_, p. 675. 7: Istan\u00e2ra-l-leyl al-bah\u00eem.\n\nFootnote 438:\n\n See Excursus H.\n\nFootnote 439:\n\n _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, I. 158. 23.\n\nFootnote 440:\n\n al-An\u1e6d\u00e2\u1e33i, _Tazy\u00een al-asw\u00e2\u1e33_, etc., p. 405.\n\nFootnote 441:\n\n _Ma\u1e33\u00e2m\u00e2s_, p. 128; cf. Mehren, _Rhetorik der Araber_, p. 99.\n\nFootnote 442:\n\n al-Buch\u00e2r\u00ee, IX. 35.\n\nFootnote 443:\n\n The notion of the white colour of the moon is also the foundation of\n one of the Hebrew names of the moon. In the verse \u1e92abyatun adm\u00e2\u02beu\n mithla-l-hil\u00e2l\u00ee \u2018a gazelle red like the new moon\u2019 (_A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, VI. 122.\n 21) the moon is treated as red. But in the appellation al-lay\u00e2li\n al-b\u00ee\u1e0d \u2018white nights,\u2019 by which are meant nights illumined throughout\n by the moon, the moonshine is associated with a white colour.\n\nFootnote 444:\n\n _Die H\u00f6llenfahrt der Istar_, p. 75.\n\nFootnote 445:\n\n Hal\u00e9vy, _ibid._, p. 556.\n\nFootnote 446:\n\n See Excursus I.\n\nFootnote 447:\n\n See Excursus K.\n\nFootnote 448:\n\n Among the Arabic names of the sun, we find the curious appellation\n al-jaun\u00e2 (Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 324), a word of colour, which belongs to\n the a\u1e0dd\u00e2d of the Arabic philologians, i.e. words with contradictory\n signification, and may denote either white or black (see Redslob, _Die\n arab_. _W\u00f6rter mit entgegengesetzter Bedeutung_, G\u00f6ttingen 1873, p.\n 27). Al-jaun\u00e2 is especially the setting sun, e.g. l\u00e2 \u00e2t\u00eehi \u1e25atta ta\u0121\u00eeb\n al-jaun\u00e2, \u2018I cannot come to him till the jaun\u00e2 sets;\u2019 and the setting\n sun is well described by a colour-word which, by its faculty of\n standing for either white or black, answers to the transition from\n sunshine to darkness.\n\nFootnote 449:\n\n Communicated by Henne Am Rhyn, _Deutsche Volkssagen_ &c., p. 219. no.\n 427.\n\nFootnote 450:\n\n _Nagyidai Czig\u00e1nyok_. In the original Hungarian:\n\n Most az \u00c9j f\u00f6lvette tolvajk\u00f6p\u00f6nyeg\u00e9t,\n Eltakar\u00e1 azzal pityk\u00e9s \u00f6lt\u00f6zet\u00e9t.\n\nFootnote 451:\n\n On _Regina coeli_, see Jablonski, _Opuscula_, II. 54 _et seq_. (ed. Te\n Water).\n\nFootnote 452:\n\n In Fox Talbot, quoted by Schrader, _Die H\u00f6llenfahrt der Istar_, p. 98.\n\nFootnote 453:\n\n _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._, 1873, XXVII. p. 404.\n\nFootnote 454:\n\n G. Rawlinson, _History of Herodotus_, App. B. I., Essay X. (I. 484).\n\nFootnote 455:\n\n Schwartz, _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, 269, 274.\n\nFootnote 456:\n\n See especially Osiander in the _Zeitsch, d. D. M. G._, 1865, XIX. 242\n _et seq._\n\nFootnote 457:\n\n In Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, IV. 406.\n\nFootnote 458:\n\n The constant epithet \u2018holding the seed of bulls\u2019 brings to view the\n idea that the influence of the moon produces fertility in cattle\n (Spiegel, _Die heiligen Schriften der Parsen_ [in German], III. xxi.).\n According to Yasht, VII. 5, it is the moon \u2018that produces verdure,\n that produces good things.\u2019 Compare _Catullus_, XXXII (XXXIV) v.\n 17\u201320, where the poet apostrophises the Moon\u2014\n\n Tu cursu, Dea, menstruo\n Metiens iter annuum,\n Rustica agricolae bonis\n Tecta frugibus exples.\n\nFootnote 459:\n\n This connexion is also clear in the Hottentot mythology. Heizi Eibib,\n which means moon, is there the name of the man to whom grave-tumuli\n are consecrated, and who is addressed in prayer for good sport and\n numerous herds (Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, II. 324).\n\nFootnote 460:\n\n Max M\u00fcller\u2019s view (_Introduction to the Science of Religion_, p. 184),\n \u2018When Jeremiah speaks of the Queen of Heaven, this can only be meant\n for Astarte or Baaltis,\u2019 is correct only if Baaltis be identified with\n the Moon. The correctness of this identification, which was first\n asserted by Philo Byblius, and has been conceded by the older\n interpreters Grotius and Lyra, and by many modern ones, is very\n probable; for the name Baaltis stands in the same relation to Ba\u02bfal\n (Sun) as Milk\u00e2 to Melekh, Lebh\u00e2n\u00e2 to L\u00e2bh\u00e2n, and Ash\u00ear\u00e2 to \u00c2sh\u00ear.\n Tiele also (_Vergelijkende Geschiedenis_, p. 512) says the same as\n M\u00fcller.\n\nFootnote 461:\n\n Midr\u00e2sh Sh\u00f4ch\u00ear \u1e6c\u00f4bh on Ps. XIX. 7.\n\nFootnote 462:\n\n The contrast of Leah\u2019s weak eyes to Rachel\u2019s beauty belongs not to the\n mythic stage, but to the epic description.\n\nFootnote 463:\n\n There is no reason to separate the word shilh\u00ea from the Shaph\u02bf\u00eal\n shalh\u00ee, as Levy does in his _Chald. W\u00f4rterbuch_, II. 481; compare\n Reggio in the Hebrew journal _Ozar Nechmad_, I. 122.\n\nFootnote 464:\n\n See _Zeitschr. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft_, 1869,\n VI. 237, 252.\n\nFootnote 465:\n\n Rohlfs, _Quer durch Afrika_, I. 204.\n\nFootnote 466:\n\n _Opuscula Arabica_, pp. 16\u201339.\n\nFootnote 467:\n\n E.g. _\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, p. 609, v. 6: _N\u00e2bi\u0121\u00e2_, VI. v. 9.\n\nFootnote 468:\n\n _\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, p. 391, v. 2.\n\nFootnote 469:\n\n Commentary on _\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, _ibid._\n\nFootnote 470:\n\n The Arabian poet Ibn Mayy\u00e2d\u00e2, in a description of the lightning\n (_A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, II. 120. 9), says 'it lights up the piled-up cloud, which is\n like a herd of camels, at the head of which those that long for their\n home cry out with pain: yu\u1e0d\u00ee\u02beu \u1e63ab\u00eeran min sa\u1e25\u00e2bin ka\u02beannahu * hij\u00e2nun\n arannat lil-\u1e25an\u00eeni naw\u00e2zi\u02bfuh.\n\nFootnote 471:\n\n The ancient Arabs understood that the thunder and lightning were\n caused by the clouds whence they issued. Many passages might be quoted\n in support of this, but Leb\u00eed Mu\u02bfalla\u1e33\u00e2 v. 4, 5, is sufficient. \u1e24anna\n (to sigh, to groan with desire) is therefore equivalent to \u2018to\n thunder,\u2019 e.g. _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XIII. 32. 8. \u1e33ad ra\u02bfadat sam\u00e2\u02beuhu wa-bara\u1e33at\n wa-\u1e25annat warja\u1e25annat.\n\nFootnote 472:\n\n See W. Wright, _Opuscula Arabica_, p. 20. 10; 21. 7.\n\nFootnote 473:\n\n _Ibid._, p. 29. 2.\n\nFootnote 474:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XIX. 157. 1.\n\nFootnote 475:\n\n Jeremiah XXXI. 15, Matth. II. 18.\n\nFootnote 476:\n\n Compare al-Sherb\u00een\u00ee Hezz al-\u1e33u\u1e25\u00fbf, etc., lithographed Alexandria, p.\n 253. The Arabs also said of the red evening-sky that \u2018it wept bloody\n tears\u2019 (al-Ma\u1e33r\u00eez\u00ee, _al-Chi\u1e6da\u1e6d_, B\u00fbl\u00e2k edition, I. 430).\n\nFootnote 477:\n\n Clemens Alex. _Strom._ V. 571.\n\nFootnote 478:\n\n See N\u00f6ldeke\u2019s _Beitr\u00e4ge zur altarab. Poesie_, p. 34.\n\nFootnote 479:\n\n In mythology the clouds are also called udders. See Mannhardt, _German\n Mythenf._, pp. 176\u2013188; so in Arabic, Ibn Mu\u1e6deyr apud N\u00f6ldeke l. c.\n\nFootnote 480:\n\n Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-ishti\u1e33a\u1e33_, ed. W\u00fcstenfeld, pp. 13, 14.\n\nFootnote 481:\n\n Ibnat al-\u02bfinab, in the celebrated wine-song of W\u00e2lid b. Yaz\u00eed\n (_A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, VI. 110. 5). Wine is well known to be called in Hebrew\n \u2018Blood of the grape,\u2019 dam \u02bf\u00ean\u00e2bh (_Deut._ XXXII. 14); compare the\n Persian ch\u00f4ni r\u00fbz in Wa\u1e63\u1e63\u00e2f ed. Hammer, p. 138. 6: shahz\u00e2deg\u00e2n b\u00e2\n yekdiger ch\u00f4ni r\u00fbz chordend.\n\nFootnote 482:\n\n In Siamese luk mei is \u2018son of the tree, fruit\u2019 (Steinthal,\n _Charakteristik_, p. 150); compare Midr\u00e2sh rabb\u00e2 Leviticus, sect 7,\n where \u2018children of the tree\u2019 are spoken of, ch\u00e2la\u1e33t\u00e2 kh\u00e2bh\u00f4d la\u02bf\u00ea\u1e63\u00eem\n bishebh\u00eel ben\u00eahem. The pearl is called by Wa\u1e63\u1e63\u00e2f, p. 180. 15, z\u00e2dei\n yem \u2018son of the sea.\u2019 A curious mythological relationship is found in\n the Polynesian system; the year, a daughter of the first pair,\n combined with her own father to produce the months, and the children\n of the latter are the days (Gerland, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_,\n VI. 233).\n\nFootnote 483:\n\n Fleischer in the _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._, 1853, VII. 502 note.\n\nFootnote 484:\n\n _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XX. 54. 16.\n\nFootnote 485:\n\n Arabic tradition knows another name besides Zal\u00eech\u00e2 for this person.\n In al-\u1e6cabar\u00ee her name is given as R\u00e2\u02bf\u00eel; see Ouseley, _Travels in\n various Countries of the East_, London 1819, I. 74; also in\n al-Bey\u1e0d\u00e2w\u00ee\u2019s _Anw\u00e2r al-tanz\u00eel_, ed. Fleischer, I. 456\u20138.\n\nFootnote 486:\n\n _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._ 1849, III. 200. See above p. 73. _et seq._\n\nFootnote 487:\n\n _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, pp. 1. _et seq._\n\nFootnote 488:\n\n Weil, _Biblische Legenden der Muselm\u00e4nner_, p. 39. _Zeitschrift d. D.\n M. G._, 1861, XV. 86.\n\nFootnote 489:\n\n _Das Volksleben der Neugriechen_, Leipzig 1871, I. 36.\n\nFootnote 490:\n\n _Chips_, &c. vol. II., the latter part of \u2018Comparative Mythology,\u2019 and\n _Lectures on the Science of Language_, Second Series, Lecture IX. \u2018The\n Mythology of the Greeks.\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 491:\n\n Plutarchi _Fragmenta et Spuria_, ed. Fr. D\u00fcbner, in F. Didot\u2019s\n Collection, Paris 1855, p. 83.\n\nFootnote 492:\n\n _Lettres assyriologiques et \u00e9pigraphiques_, Paris 1872, II. fifth\n letter.\n\nFootnote 493:\n\n M\u00fcller, _History of Sanskrit Literature_, p. 530; _Chips_, &c., II.\n 163 _et seq._; Fiske, _Myths_, p. 113.\n\nFootnote 494:\n\n Schoolcraft, _Historical and Statistical Information respecting the\n History, Condition and Prospects of the Indian Tribes_, 1851, II. 136.\n\nFootnote 495:\n\n See Geiger, _J\u00fcd. Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Wissenschaft und Leben_, vol. VIII.\n p. 285. Breslau 1869.\n\nFootnote 496:\n\n Kuenen (in his _Religion of Israel_, I. 111 in the translation)\n expresses the opinion that only the degree of mutual relationship\n between the fathers of tribes was a later idea: that, e.g. the less\n noble tribes were called sons of Jacob\u2019s slave-girls, and those that\n were bound together by closer fraternal feelings were regarded as sons\n of the same mother. Compare now also Zunz, _Gesammelte Schriften_,\n Berlin 1875, I. 268.\n\nFootnote 497:\n\n There still remain some names whose etymological explanation is\n difficult, as Re\u02be\u00fbbh\u00ean and Shim\u02bf\u00f4n. Yiss\u00e2sekh\u00e2r (Issachar) translated\n literally might be \u2018the Day-labourer,\u2019 certainly a fitting designation\n for the Sun, expressing how he does his day\u2019s work, like a\n day-labourer. Yet I cannot look upon that as a mythical description,\n because it would be an unpardonable anachronism to suppose that that\n primeval age when myths were created would speak of day-labourers,\n especially after the fashion in which the idea is expressed by the\n word Yiss\u00e2-sekh\u00e2r, \u2018he takes up his _wages_.\u2019\n\nFootnote 498:\n\n Which according to al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee, _\u1e24ay\u00e2t al-\u1e25ayw\u00e2n_, B\u00fbl\u00e2\u1e33 1274, II. 219,\n is used only of the rising sun; we can say \u1e6dala\u02bfat al-\u0121az\u00e2l\u00e2 \u2018the\n gazelle rises,\u2019 but not \u0121arabat \u2018he sets.\u2019 Ab\u00fb Sa\u02bf\u00eed al-Rustam\u00ee the\n poet (in Beh\u00e2 al-D\u00een al-\u02bf\u00c2mil\u00ee, _Keshk\u00fbl_, p. 164. 13) carries out the\n mythological figure still further, using the verb na\u1e6da\u1e25a \u2018to butt,\u2019\n said of horned beasts. Describing a fine building, he says tan\u00e2\u1e6da\u1e25a\n \u1e33arna-sh-shamsi min sharaf\u00e2tihi, that \u2018as to splendour it butts in\n rivalry with the sun\u2019\u2014as if the palace and the sun were knocking their\n horns together.\n\nFootnote 499:\n\n _Babyl. Tract. Y\u00f4m\u00e2_, fol. 29. a: \u2018As the hind\u2019s horns branch out to\n every side, so also the light of dawn spreads out to all sides.\u2019\n\nFootnote 500:\n\n _Journal asiatique_, 1861, II. 437.\n\nFootnote 501:\n\n Caussin de Perceval, _Essai sur l\u2019histoire des Arabes avant\n l\u2019Islamisme_, I. 260.\n\nFootnote 502:\n\n Given in the Appendix to this work.\n\nFootnote 503:\n\n Lenormant, _La Magie chez les Chald\u00e9ens_, Paris 1874, p. 140. In the\n decadence of magic, however, the horns, which are connected with\n magic, are used even outside the cycle of solar gods; e.g. \u2018On voit\n Bin la t\u00eate surmont\u00e9e de la tiare royale arm\u00e9e de cornes de taureau,\n les \u00e9paules munies de quatre grandes ailes, etc.,\u2019 _ibid._ p. 50. Here\n the horns are for butting, not to symbolise rays. However, in this\n particular case of Bin the mythical meaning is not very clear. As he\n is sometimes called \u2018the southern sun over \u02bfEl\u00e2m,\u2019 _ibid._ p. 121, the\n horns in the passage quoted may have something to do with his solar\n character.\n\nFootnote 504:\n\n _Deorum Concilium_, 10.\n\nFootnote 505:\n\n See Herodotus, II. 42, IV. 181.\n\nFootnote 506:\n\n We will not claim any importance for the fact that in Sanchuniathon\u2019s\n account of the sacrifice of Isaac the name Je\u00fbd is given instead of\n Isaac; consequently if Je\u00fbd be identical with the Hebrew Jeh\u00fbd\u00e2, the\n fact that Je\u00fbd is here equivalent to Isaac would prove the solar\n character of Jeh\u00fbd\u00e2.\n\nFootnote 507:\n\n Angelo de Gubernatis, in his _Zoological Mythology_, is peculiarly\n indefinite on the mythological significance of this animal; compare\n Pleyte, _La Religion des Pr\u00e9-Israelites_, Leyden 1865, p. 151, where\n much useful information will be found on the worship of the Ass.\n\nFootnote 508:\n\n See Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, pp. 494 and 1163.\n\nFootnote 509:\n\n On the Arabic proper name _\u1e24im\u00e2r_, Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 362, may be consulted;\n cf. Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-ishti\u1e33\u00e2\u1e33_, p. 4. The Arabic proper name\n Mis\u1e25al is also connected with the Ass; it alludes to the screeching of\n the wild-ass; see _Tebr\u00eez\u00ee\u2019s Scholia to the \u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, p. 200 penult.\n Compare _al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee_, II. 98: akfar min \u1e24im\u00e2r.\n\nFootnote 510:\n\n _\u1e32azw\u00een\u00ee_, ed. W\u00fcstenfeld, I. 77, II. 166. I must also just refer to\n the story of Mu\u1e6d\u02bfim, as told in Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, IV. 565, and mention that\n Mu\u1e6d\u02bfim \u2018he who gives food\u2019 is likewise the name of an ancient Arabian\n idol. Even Krehl, in his work on the _Preislamite Religion of the\n Arabs_, p. 61, attempted to explain mythologically the story of Is\u00e2f\n and N\u00e2\u02beil\u00e2, interpreting the latter name as \u2018she who kisses.\u2019\n\nFootnote 511:\n\n Pharez and Zarah in the English Bible, derived through the LXX. from\n the pausal forms P\u00e2re\u1e63 and Z\u00e2rach.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 512:\n\n And English _Daybreak_.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 513:\n\n From Hajnal \u2018dawn,\u2019 and hasad\u00e1s, abstract substantive from root hasad\n \u2018to split, tear open.\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 514:\n\n Ab\u00fb Nuw\u00e2s says of the dawn, maft\u00fb\u1e33-ul-ad\u00eemi, _Y\u00e2\u1e33ut_, III. 697. 22.\n\nFootnote 515:\n\n This hymn is applied to Dan, to whom it is quite unsuitable, as Dan\n has a solar character. We are tempted to conjecture that it originally\n referred to a non-solar figure, perhaps actually to Levi, whose name\n is synonymous with n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh \u2018serpent.\u2019 This is the more probable,\n because no separate section of Jacob\u2019s Blessing is devoted to this\n son, and in the only words relating to him he is coupled with Simeon.\n\nFootnote 516:\n\n See _Zeitsch. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie &c._, 1871, VII. 307.\n\nFootnote 517:\n\n The first chapter of the _Vendid\u00e2d_ translated and explained, in\n Bunsen\u2019s _Egypt\u2019s Place_ &c. III. 494 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 518:\n\n As raoidhitem may also signify \u2018running\u2019 (root rudh = to flow and to\n run), a \u2018running snake,\u2019 literally the same as n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh b\u00e2r\u00eeach, might\n be meant.\n\nFootnote 519:\n\n M\u00f6ller, _Kosmogonie_, p. 193.\n\nFootnote 520:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Chips_ &c., II. 164; Fiske, _Myths_ &c., p. 113. On the\n blinding, see p. 109 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 521:\n\n See al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee, _\u1e24ay\u00e2t al-heyv\u00e2n_, I. 70.\n\nFootnote 522:\n\n See Excursus L.\n\nFootnote 523:\n\n Connected with \u0121ashiya \u2018to veil.\u2019\n\nFootnote 524:\n\n See Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 749.\n\nFootnote 525:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Chips_ &c., II. 68.\n\nFootnote 526:\n\n Arsala ach\u00e2hu Sheyb\u00fbb ta\u1e25t al-leyl, _\u02bfAntar_, VI. 102. 9.\n\nFootnote 527:\n\n _\u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2_, p. 566. v. 2.\n\nFootnote 528:\n\n Lib\u00e2san, compare S\u00fbr. VII. v. 52; XIII. v. 3; yu\u0121sh\u00ee-l-leyla-n-nah\u00e2ra.\n\nFootnote 529:\n\n In _Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt_, I. 24. 2.\n\nFootnote 530:\n\n \u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee, p. 162, 2nd ed.; compare the Commentary, in which particular\n stress is laid on the act of covering up: li\u02beannahu yu\u0121a\u1e6d\u1e6d\u00ee m\u00e2 f\u00eeh\u00ee.\n Compare al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee, II. 112. 23: al-leyl yuw\u00e2r\u00ee \u1e25a\u1e0danan.\n\nFootnote 531:\n\n Eur. _Ion_, v. 1150; it is also called \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1, and in\n Aeschylus, _Prom._ v. 24 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cd\u03be, from the gay robe of stars.\n\nFootnote 532:\n\n Compare _King Richard II._, III. 2. \u2018The cloak of night being pluck'd\n from off their backs.\u2019\n\nFootnote 533:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, III. 28. 24.\n\nFootnote 534:\n\n I quote also a passage from the Uigur language: \u2018The creation tore its\n black shirt,\u2019 _i.e._ the day has dawned: V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, _Kudatku Bilik_, p.\n 218; compare p. 70, \u2018I have put off the cloak of darkness;\u2019 p. 219,\n \u2018The daughter of the west spreads out her carpet.\u2019\n\nFootnote 535:\n\n Max M\u00fcller, _Chips_, &c., II. 83. Schwartz, _Ursprung d. Mythologie_,\n p. 245.\n\nFootnote 536:\n\n al-Bey\u1e0d\u00e2w\u00ee\u2019s Commentary on the _\u1e32or\u00e2n_, I. 19. 21 _et seq._\n Ab\u00fb-l-Ba\u1e33\u00e2, _Kulli\u00e2t_, p. 305.\n\nFootnote 537:\n\n See Excursus G.\n\nFootnote 538:\n\n Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 322.\n\nFootnote 539:\n\n _The Poetical Works_ of Beh\u00e2-ed-D\u00een Zoheir of Egypt. By E.H. Palmer,\n Cambridge 1876, I. 108. 7. It is impossible to quote this edition\n without an expression of admiration for the perfection to which Arabic\n typography has been brought in England in this magnificent Oriental\n work, the production of which redounds to the imperishable credit of\n the University of Cambridge. It may be pronounced one of the most\n beautiful Oriental books that have ever been printed in Europe; and\n the learning of the editor worthily rivals the technical get-up of the\n creations of the soul of one of the most tasteful poets of Isl\u00e2m, the\n study of which will contribute not a little to save the honour of the\n poetry of the Arabs. Here first we make the acquaintance of a poet who\n gives us something better than monotonous descriptions of camels and\n deserts, and may even be regarded as superior in charm to\n al-Mutanabb\u00ee.\n\nFootnote 540:\n\n _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte der Sprachgelehrsamkeit bei den Arabern_, no.\n 1, in the _Sitzungsberichte der kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften_,\n Vienna 1871, Jan. p. 222 _et seq._; or in the reprint p. 18 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 541:\n\n Wallin\u2019s articles in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1851, V. 17; but see\n above p. 43.\n\nFootnote 542:\n\n See Vatke, _Biblische Theologie_, p. 327, and Gesenius, _Thesaurus_,\n p. 711, where importance is attached to this.\n\nFootnote 543:\n\n The conception of Cherubim penetrated even into Mohammedan regions,\n e.g. \u1e24\u00e2fi\u1e93, ed. Rosenzweig, III. 526 _penult._, chalweti kerr\u00fbbi\u00e2n\n \u02bf\u00e2lem-i-\u1e33uds.\n\nFootnote 544:\n\n _Ueber die s\u00fcdarabische Sage_, Leipzig 1866 p. 27.\n\nFootnote 545:\n\n See Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 697.\n\nFootnote 546:\n\n See Dillmann, in Schenkel\u2019s _Bibellexikon_, I. 511.\n\nFootnote 547:\n\n _Ibid._, V. 284.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n _THE MYTH OF CIVILISATION AND THE FIRST SHAPING OF HEBREW RELIGION._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. In close connexion with that stage of development of the\nmyth-producing faculty which is inaugurated by the beginnings of\nagricultural life, is found a natural consequence of the solar myth\namong agriculturists\u2014the Myth of Civilisation.\n\nWe have seen that the advance in civilisation from the nomad life to the\nagricultural stage is accompanied by that inversion of the direction of\nthe myth which puts the Sun in the foreground and allows a tone\nfavourable to him to prevail in it, whereas at the nomad stage it was\nthe night-sky and the phenomena of nature connected with it that\nengrossed the sympathy of the formers of myths. Now here we again\nencounter a remarkable phenomenon. No intricate psychological foundation\nor historical demonstration is required to prove that our own stage of\ncivilisation\u2014and not ours alone\u2014is intellectually qualified to compare\nitself either with a lower stage through which it has long since passed,\nor with a higher which is now only beginning to be aimed at by our best\nspirits,\u2014so as to estimate its value from the point of view given us by\nour social system. For let two different stages of civilisation, social\nsystems or conditions be brought before any man\u2019s observation so that he\nnotes their essential difference, and the perception of this difference\nwill awaken an impulse to measure them off against one another and form\na judgment on the perfection of the one and the insufficiency of the\nother. And not only does the man who has reached the higher stage feel\nhimself impelled to compare his new condition with that of those who\nremain behind on the less perfect stage already passed by him; but also\nthose who stand on the lower stage, but are acquainted with the altered\nmode of life of others, contemplate the advanced stage and set off its\nvalue against that of the stage on which they still stand. Thus we have\nseen above that huntsmen and fishermen have their ideas about\nagricultural life. Still he who has reached the higher stage will be\nmore generally impelled to such meditations than those who still stand\non the lower. When the question has arisen in his mind, it must finally\nculminate in the enquiry, What was the origin or who was the author of\nthe great advance which procures for him such advantages over one who\nstands lower? It is true, the agriculturist is not always conscious that\nhis stage of civilisation is the result of an _advance_ at all; for in\nmany nations there exists no consciousness that any less perfect stage\npreceded that of the agriculturist. But this consciousness is not a\nnecessary condition of the raising of the question; the mere observation\nof the _difference_ between the two stages of civilisation suffices to\nprompt it. And it will come more and more into the foreground when the\ngradual progress within the limits of the agricultural stage has\nadvanced so far as to develop the social consequences of the new state\nin all their fulness. Social order and laws are non-existent for the\nnomad, who has not yet formed for himself any permanent social system.\nAt his stage they are not merely superfluous, but even in a certain\nsense inconceivable. The wranglings, the objects of which are chiefly\nwells and pastures, are settled and composed, not by laws and rights\nestablished once for all, but by strength of arm, or between disputants\nof peaceful disposition by separation: \u2018And there arose strife between\nthe herdsmen of Abram\u2019s cattle and the herdsmen of Lot\u2019s cattle. And\nAbram said to Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and\nthee, between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen; for we are brethren. Is not\nthe whole land before thee? Separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if\nthou goest to the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou\ngoest to the right hand, then I will go to the left\u2019 (Gen. XIII.\n7\u20139).[548] And on occasion of a dispute about a well, Abimelech said to\nIsaac: \u2018Go from us; for thou art much mightier than we. And Isaac\ndeparted thence, and pitched his tent in the valley of Gerar, and dwelt\nthere\u2019 (Gen. XXVI. 16, 17). Arts, manufactures and other occupations are\ninconceivable at this stage; for the wants of the nomad are so limited\nthat the conditions of his existence are satisfied by his tents, herds,\nand pasture-ground.\n\nThe answer which the agriculturist gives to the question about the\norigin of the arts and manufactures, of social order and law, all of\nthem products of agricultural life, is what we call the Myth of\nCivilisation. This Myth of Civilisation, which we encounter among the\nmost various nations, refers the authorship of the advanced and refined\nstate of civilisation to the _Solar figures_ of the myth, which, to the\nprejudice of the figures of the dark sky, are brought into the\nforeground by the human mind on its advance to agriculture. It is\ntherefore a spontaneous act of the human mind that is made the cause of\na series of phenomena, of which it is itself really the result.\n\nThe Greek and Roman mythology abounds with data verifying the Solar\ncharacter of the stories of the origin of civilisation and morals. Arts\nand manufactures are constantly brought into connexion with mythical\nnames which are recognised by comparative philologists as designations\nof the Sun. Not only the musician but the smith of Olympus are Solar\nfigures; so also the first navigator and founder of cities. The right\nunderstanding of Mythology was long hindered by the so-called\nEuhemeristic system, which assumed that the gods of mythology, and\nespecially of the Greek and Roman mythology (for scarcely any others\nwere sufficiently known to be considered), were only great benefactors\nof humanity, who after their death were rewarded by divine honours; and\nthis system has been maintained till the present day. The Myth of\nCivilisation consequently had to be fitted into the frame of this\nconvenient system. It was said that posterity had from mere _Gratitude_\nraised the inventor of the arts to the throne of deity. Petrarch says,\n\u2018We know that the founders of some arts after their death were rewarded\nby divine honours, rather from grateful than from pious feelings ...\nThus Apollo was made a god through his lyre, Apollo and Aesculapius\nthrough medicine, Saturn, Liber and Ceres through agriculture, Vulcan\nthrough his smithy.\u2019[549] This mode of regarding the subject was not\nonly upheld from Euhemerus down to Petrarch, but exerted its influence\non the interpretation of the ancient stories even to our own times.\n\nHowever, the consideration of the store of legends of humanity in\ngeneral, as far as they are brought under our ken, collected and\nanalysed according to their historical and psychological truths, teaches\nus that the founder of all the order and morality which result from the\nmore civilised agricultural life is, in the language of the old stories,\nthe Sun. The so-called Myths of Civilisation are always put into\nconnexion with the Sun, or with some of the copious synonyms which\nmythology gives to the Sun. These myths must exist in every nation which\nhas won its upward way from nomadism to agriculture, or from tribal life\nto society. As soon as the agriculturist began to use the ploughshare,\nhe could not but observe the difference between his life and that of the\nnomad, who fixed his tent-plugs in the earth at a different place from\nday to day, moving from pasture to pasture, whilst he himself had the\ncontrol of permanent dwellings, protected by definite unalterable laws,\nand lived a life of regularity, yet full of enjoyment and variety,\nstrongly contrasting with the Bedaw\u00ee\u2019s monotonous independence. Then,\nwhen the source of this difference was sought, all the advance was\nattributed to the Sun, as the author and encourager of agriculture and\ninventor of the more refined arts and enjoyments of life. Moreover, the\nconnexion which the Myth of Civilisation establishes between the Founder\nof cities and the Wolf, as e.g. between Romulus and a she-wolf who\nsuckled him, has lately been explained by Prof. Sepp through the\nsignification given to the wolf in the solar myth\u2014with perfect justice,\nthough perhaps going rather too far in the elaboration of details.[550]\nLike Apollo, Osiris also is \u03b3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2, \u039c\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2, \u2018Inventor\nof agriculture and teacher of the arts;\u2019[551] and in this point the\nmyths of nations quite distinct in race agree. A few examples taken from\nsources wide apart will make this clear.\n\nOne of the Solar heroes of the Persian myth of civilisation is Jemsh\u00eed,\nwhose character can scarcely be doubtful to the mythologist, after the\nconsentaneous characteristics with which the epic poet Fird\u00f4s\u00ee and the\nhistorian Mirchond fill up the description of his life.[552] His very\nname indicates clearly enough a solar signification; and to this must be\nadded the fact that he combines many characteristics of the solar\nsupporters of the Myth of Civilisation. He first gives to Ir\u00e2n, till\nthen savage, the benefits of civilisation. He is the first builder of\ncities, the inventor of the fine arts, especially of music, navigation\n(which belongs especially to the solar myth, as we have seen), and, as\nMirchond explains at length, of the cultivation of the vine\u2014an Iranian\nNoah. He divides the whole nation into four classes: Scribes, Warriors,\nAgriculturists, and Artists. Thus it is he who puts an end to the\nnomadic tribal life. In this breaking up into castes not the slightest\ntrace is discoverable of any notice of pastoral life; on the contrary,\nin the story of Jemsh\u00eed as worked out by the later narrator, probably in\nclose agreement with the still living mythical tradition, especial\nweight is laid on _Agriculture_. The solar chronology is also due to\nJemsh\u00eed. Mirchond says: \u2018As often as the Chosrev of the stars, the Sun,\ntook away the royal robe of rays from the fish\u2019s tail and threw it on\nthe neck of the ram, Jemsh\u00eed appointed an assemblage of the great and\nnoble at the foot of the throne. He instituted all the appliances of\npleasure, and spread out the carpet of joy, and called the day Neur\u00fbz.\u2019\nThe Prometheus-side of the Jemsh\u00eed-story is surprising. The Persian hero\nof civilisation, like the Greek, is chastised and hurled down by God for\nhis presumption; his fall is occasioned by _Zohak_, who conquers him,\n_from whose shoulders dragons grow up_ (the dragons of the Storm and the\nNight). After a fall of a hundred years he appears on the coast of the\nChinese sea. The Sun is devoured by the monster waiting for him at the\nbottom of the sea, but afterwards rises again out of the sea, like Jonah\nin the Hebrew myth.\n\nIf now we turn from ancient Ir\u00e2n to the American tribes, we find the\nMyth of Civilisation take the same direction. There also the origin of\nmorals, law and order is attributed to the Sun. I quote one of the\nnumerous myths of civilisation from J.G. M\u00fcller, who deserves great\ncredit for his work on American religions, which makes American\nmythology known in Germany. It is the myth of civilisation belonging to\nthe Muyscas, inhabitants of the Terra Firma in the plain of Bogot\u00e0, who\ntell as follows of the commencement of civilisation among themselves:\n\u2018In the earliest times, before the moon was, the high plain of\nCundinamarca was closed in and the pass of Tequendama not yet opened.\nThen the Muyscas people were savage, without agriculture, without\nreligion, without morals, without civil rule. Then there appeared _a\nbearded old man who came from the East_, who had three names, Bochica,\nNenequetheba, and Zuh\u00e9, and was represented as having three heads. He\ntaught the savages to wear clothes, to till the land, to worship the\ngods, to form states. His wife had also three names, Huythaca, Chia,\nYubecayguaya. She was dazzlingly beautiful, but so malicious that she\nplotted to destroy all her husband\u2019s salutary undertakings. And she\nactually succeeded by secret magic arts, in causing the Funzha (now Rio\nBogot\u00e0), the river of the country, to rise to such a height as to\noverwhelm the whole high plain with flood. Only a minority of the\ninhabitants were able to escape to the summits of the mountains. But\nthen the just wrath of Bochica was kindled; he drove the wicked woman\noff the earth for ever, and changed her into the Moon. Since then there\nhas been a moon. And to get rid of the troubles of the earth, Bochica\nmade an opening in the wall of rock, and allowed the water to run off by\nthe majestic waterfall of Tequendama, 570 feet high. When the land was\nthus dried, the people that were left were called to civilisation, and\nthe Solar worship was introduced, with a sacerdotal order, periodical\nfeasts, sacrifices and pilgrimages. At the head of the state Bochica set\na secular and a sacerdotal chief, settled the chronology, and after a\nlife of two thousand years at length withdrew, bearing the name\nIdacanzas.\u2019[553]\n\nSo much for the Myth of Civilisation. It is certainly wrong to try to\nfind matter of history in these stories of civilisation, and, with\nMarkham, Rivero, and Tschudi, to see in Bochica and the other bearded\nheroes of civilisation belonging to American mythology \u2018missionaries of\nthe worship of Brahma, of Buddha, and probably of other sects.\u2019[554] My\nreaders will surely perceive the perverseness of such a proceeding. J.G.\nM\u00fcller himself recognised the Sun in Bochica, the civiliser of the\nMuyscas; but he did not find out all the mythological relations which\ndetermine his solar character. The most important of these is the\ncircumstance that Bochica is \u2018a bearded old man, who came from the\nEast.\u2019 Here then, as in other American myths, the Sun\u2019s rays are\nregarded as the long white beard of the old man of the sun, in the same\nsense in which they appear elsewhere under the form of _locks_ of hair\n(see supra, p. 137). And as in Egyptian the rising sun has a different\nname from the setting, and the same distinction of name is stamped upon\nthe Hebrew myth also (Leah and Delilah on the one side, and Dinah,\nZilpah, Asher, etc. on the other), so in the myth of the Muyscas the\nthree names of the Sun refer to his various positions at rising, noon,\nand setting, which probably played a part in the ancient myth of the\nMuyscas. The corresponding three faces of the Sun express the same idea\nthat produced the myth of the two of Janus (see p. 137); with the\ndifference that the American myth notices three phases of the Sun, and\nthe Roman only two. The Sun is opposed by the Moon, the sky of day is\nengaged in an everlasting war with the sky of night. The circumstance\nthat the moon causes the flood exactly agrees with the American\nconception, which connects water with the moon.[555] The moon also is\nprovided with three names in our American myth, and these three names\nhave the same signification as the three of the Sun, i.e. the conception\nthat each of the varying phases of the moon is itself an independent\nobject. Dr. Anton Henne, a Swiss mythologist, first considered the\nmeaning of the three visible forms of the moon (as contrasted with the\nfour astronomical phases) in mythology, especially German, and cited\nsome parallels from classical mythology.[556] Now although this feature\nof the triple form of the moon is undoubtedly expressed in many myths,\namong others in the American one under review, yet Henne-Am-Rhyn seems\nto go rather too far, in referring the many variations of the German\nstory of the three spinning girls and so forth to this mythical idea.\nMany of these variants bear the undeniable impress of a mythical\ndescription of the setting Sun\u2019s or the Night\u2019s battle with the bright\nSun of day; especially that in which one of the Sisters is quite white,\nthe second half-white and half-black, and the third _blind_.\nUnquestionably the Sun of day is the quite white sister; the Sun shortly\nbefore setting the half-white and half-black; and the Night the blind\none (see supra, pp. 109\u201310).[557] The solar character of the princess\nM\u00e4rth\u00f6ll (no. 586, Henne-Am-Rhyn), _who is as beautiful as the sun, and\ncan only weep golden tears_ (see Excursus E), can escape no one.\n\nThe moon-lit sky of night appears in the Myth of Civilisation averse to\nall the blessings which the Sun grants to the agriculturist. In this\ncharacter it appears frequently, especially in the American\nmythology;[558] whereas in the Oriental the connexion between the moon\nand water suggests the idea that the moon produces fertility and\nfreshness in the soil (see supra, p. 160). In the Voguls\u2019 story of\ncivilisation, a small fragment of which, from the collections made by\nAntony Reguly, is contained in the important work of the Hungarian\nAcademician Paul Hunfalvy on the \u2018Country and People of the\nVoguls,\u2019[559] _Kulyater_ is the builder of the first city. The solar\ncharacter of Kulyater cannot be doubted, if the following portion of the\nVogul story be taken into consideration: \u2018He dwelt in a house locked\nwith seven iron locks. Tarom was angry with him, and seized him by one\nfoot, and he fell into the heart of the foaming sea.\u2019 This is the\nsunset. The reason why the Founder of Cities (whom the Vogul reckons\namong the evil spirits and regards as the originator of death[560])\nappears here in an unfavourable light is the same as that which we shall\ndiscover for the tone of dislike which the Hebrew story adopts towards\nthe agriculturist Cain. Till they became Russified the Voguls remained\nprevailingly a hunting people, and their myths did not rise to the\nelevation of the view of the world possessed by agriculturists. The\nVogul story of the Creation[561] reflects exactly the ideas of a hunting\nand fishing people; it speaks only of the chase and of catching fish.\n\nNow we have seen that the Myth of Civilisation expresses the same idea\nin nations of the most different races. Even in the Japanese myths of\ncivilisation, published by the learned Japanese Dira Kittao,[562] a\nthoroughly solar character is evident. Manufactures and arts, social\norder and law are always attributed to the Sun as author, not only by\nAryans, but even by the still unclassified American tribes. If the\nknowledge of the American languages were more advanced than it is in our\ntime, and if the mutual relations of those languages were not\n\u2018exceedingly perplexing, for the same reason as those presented by the\nPolynesian and African dialects, and in a yet higher degree,\u2019[563] we\nmight gain some understanding of the origin of the many proper names\nwhich we encounter in the above myth and in the other members of the\ncopious American mythology; and this would lead us to a far more\naccurate idea of their origin and life than is possible with petrified\nmyths of civilisation. Nevertheless, before we part from them, we will\nstill just notice that the introduction of social laws, political\nconstitutions and religious institutions such as are ascribed in the\nMuyscas\u2019 myth to the Sun himself as an old man, is frequently attributed\nto the _sons of the Sun_. There is no need to prove that in such stories\nthe sons of the Sun are identical with their father the Sun. So e.g.\nOrpheus, son of the Sun, calls into cities men living a savage life in\nthe forests, and urges them to a more civilised life. Again, the Indian\nlegislator Vaivasuta is son of the Sun. And, not to neglect again here\nAmerican mythology, the two sons of the Sun, Manco Copac and Mama Oello,\nare brought forward in the Peruvian myth of civilisation as teachers of\ncivilisation. There is no reason whatever to identify Mama Oello with\nthe Moon, as J.G. M\u00fcller does;[564] and it would even run counter to the\nvery nature of the Myth of Civilisation. For, as we saw in the\npreviously cited American myth, the Moon is the very power that\nparalyses the work of the Sun in introducing civilisation and law. To\nthis place belongs also the idea, which is found in many nations, that\nthe founders of their legislation and religion were born from virgins,\nmade to conceive by the Sun\u2019s rays.[565] This element of the solar myth\nstill operates in a story told by the Persian poet Fer\u00eed al-D\u00een \u02bfA\u1e6d\u1e6d\u00e2r,\nwho introduces a maiden\u2019s dream as follows: \u2018Then the Christian maiden\nsaw in a dream that a Sun _fell into her lap_, opened his mouth and\nsaid, etc.[566]\u2019\n\n\n\u00a7 2. The sources of the ancient Hebrew mythology have preserved no less\nconsiderable remains of the Hebrew people\u2019s myth of civilisation; and it\nmoves in the same direction as has been indicated above. The invention\nof arts and manufactures, morals, law, and social order, is attributed\nto Solar figures. Especially note-worthy in this connexion is the fourth\nchapter of Genesis, where mention is made of the beginning of the\nbuilding of cities, and of the invention of agricultural and of musical\ninstruments; and the ninth chapter of the same book, in which the first\ncommencement of social order secured by law is related. All this is\nattached to names of which other mythical features besides those\nconcerning civilisation are recorded, features which point to their\nsolar significance, and serve to fill up the story of the civilising\nactivity of their bearers.\n\nBut the Solar figures are authors not of manufactures and civil order\nonly: the human race itself has the Sun as its author, through whose\nchildren mankind is propagated. The name \u00c2d\u00e2m, Ab\u00fb-l-bashar \u2018father of\nall flesh,\u2019 as the Arabs call him, is, as is obvious at a glance, a\nsolar appellation \u2018the Red\u2019; etymologically the same word as Ed\u00f4m. When\nthe Hebrew story of civilisation derives the human race from the Red\none, it does the same as the Greeks when they call the mother of mankind\nPyrrha \u2018the Red.\u2019[567] The Hebrews call the mother of mankind Chaww\u00e2\n(Eve) \u2018the mother of all that lives\u2019 (Gen. III. 29),[568] i.e., \u2018the\nCirculating\u2019 (in Arabic \u1e25awa V), a name of the Sun, the feminine synonym\nof Zebh\u00fbl\u00fbn \u2018the Round;\u2019 a very ancient appellation of the Sun, the\ntraces of which we meet also in the Vedas, where (Rigveda, I. 174. 5)\nthe Sun is called a Wheel, or, as he frequently is in other passages, a\nChariot. This is based not only on the conception of the Horses of the\nSun drawing his chariot, but on the original conception of this chariot,\nas consisting of a single wheel or of a cylinder on a sloping plain, as\nLazarus Geiger has admirably demonstrated.[569]\n\nIt is also to be considered that the mythological genealogy of the\nHebrews makes the world to be peopled by the descendants of Cain,\nchildren of the Sun, and that a second progenitor of the human race,\nNoah, is likewise a solar figure. We must here of course disregard the\nlate Seth-genealogy, at the time of the drawing up of which even the\nminimum of mythical conception necessary to the working-out of the Myth\nof Civilisation had already vanished. It is not impossible that\noriginally two or even more now forgotten versions of the myth of\npopulation existed\u2014one which called the first father of the human race\nAdam, and another which attached the propagation of mankind to the name\nNoah, and that then, by the interposition of the story of the Flood\nwhich made the whole human race perish, the two versions grew into\nharmony with one another in the popular mind. But in any case it is\ncertain that the Hebrews made Solar figures the ancestors of mankind.\n\nThus among the Hebrews also it was the Solar myth that answered the\nquestion concerning the primeval origin of agricultural civilisation;\nand thus was completed the picture of what modern interpreters love to\ncall the \u2018Origins.\u2019 It is this side of the formation of legends which\nmaintains its life and productiveness longest among men. For there is\nalways a latent instinct and powerful impulse in the mind of man to\ncancel all notes of interrogation, and to gain and to give intelligence\non the origin of all that surrounds him. We well know how many stories\nare current in the mouth of the people, stories of comparatively modern\norigin, which have for their subject the rise of rivers, mountains and\ninstitutions. How charming are the Hungarian stories invented to explain\nthe origin of the two great rivers which traverse that beautiful\ncountry! and who knows not into what petty details this impulse of the\nhuman mind pushes its way? It treats nothing as a matter of course and\nas sufficiently explained by the mere fact of its existence; it finds\neverywhere a Why and a How, that must be answered. It not only seeks\nreasons of existence, and dives into cosmogonies, for the overpowering\nuniverse of the world and the grander features of it, mountains and\nseas; but even what distinguishes one being from another\u2014the ox\u2019s horns\nand the camel\u2019s short ears, the lion\u2019s mane and the black stripes on the\nass\u2019s back\u2014it cannot leave unexplained. It is the same noble instinct\nthat created the fables on the origin of things, and that encourages the\ngrand discoveries of the truths of natural history: the instinct that\nimpels us to understand aright all that lies around us.\n\nIt may be affirmed that among the Semites this impulse to explain the\norigins of things maintained its longest existence as a living power,\nproductive of stories. Even on the subjects on which the Biblical\naccounts gave information, men did not rest satisfied with these\naccounts, but allowed free and unlimited scope to stories.[570] A large\npart, indeed almost the whole, of the Arabian answers to questions\nconcerning the Origins, is a Postislamic product of popular story. All\nthat the Arabs learned on the subject from tradition or from stories\nstill in process of formation was collected in works entitled Kutub\nal-aw\u00e2\u02beil, or \u2018Libri Principiorum.\u2019 The best known and widest circulated\nof these, is the Kit\u00e2b al-aw\u00e2\u02beil, written by Jel\u00e2l al-D\u00een al-Suy\u00fb\u1e6d\u00ee, a\nvoluminous writer of the tenth Mohammedan century, a part of which was\npublished by Professor Richard Gosche, with an instructive introduction\non literary history.[571] In former times it was so extensively\ncirculated in the East that a revised version was also prepared, which\nwas everywhere copied even before the clean copy (taby\u00ee\u1e0d) was made.[572]\nBut several hundred years before al-Suy\u00fb\u1e6d\u00ee, an Andalusian scholar, T\u00e2j\nal-D\u00een b. \u1e24amm\u00fby\u00e2 al-Sarachsh\u00ee (born A.H. 576) had written a work in\neight volumes on the Origins of Things; and I believe that this work, of\nwhich the classic historian of the Moors in Spain[573] gives an account,\nis the most extensive of its kind. In the above-quoted work, Gosche\nmaintains the view that the whole S\u00eapher t\u00f4led\u00f4th, which is familiar to\nus as one of the original elements of which the composite Book of\nGenesis consists, was mainly concerned with these \u2018Origins,\u2019 and is the\nHebrew representative of the copious Aw\u00e2\u02beil literature of the Arabs. But\nwe cannot admit this, when we consider that this book of sources, to\njudge from its known fragments, has rather a genealogical character,\nand, though containing the myths of civilisation, does not embrace the\ncosmogony, which is of a decidedly later origin. Therefore, if we must\nat any price find an analogy in Arabic literature to the S\u00eapher\nt\u00f4led\u00f4th, we ought rather to look to the many works composing the\ncopious genealogical literature of the Arabs, called Kutub\nal-ans\u00e2b.[574]\n\n\n\u00a7 3. In regard to the Hebrew myths of civilisation we must pay attention\nto another circumstance; to do which we must again go back to what has\nbeen said above on the phases of development of the myths. In\ndetermining the amount of mythical matter which was worked out in any\nperiod of development of human civilisation, we must not, as was fully\nexplained above, start from the materials and the elements employed in\nthe myths in question, so much as from the direction or tendency of the\nmyth and the general ideas which prevail in it. But yet this view\nrequires some qualification, insofar as the designation of some human\noccupation is employed in the phraseology of the myth. I mention this\nwith especial reference to the name \u1e32ayin (Cain), which denotes\nSmith.[575] It is obvious that this manufacture must have already\nexisted in society before such a name could come to be employed in a\nmyth. But, on the other hand, the myth of the war of the Sun with the\nCloud or the Wind cannot have so recent an origin. We must accordingly\nconcede to the Myth of Civilisation an influence upon the form of the\nmythic matter\u2014an influence which not only produced an alteration in the\ntendency of the myth, but also introduced new names and figures, which,\nas is evident from the linguistic meaning of the names themselves, arose\nat the stage of conscious civilisation. The story of the murder of Abel\nbelongs, no doubt, to the primitive myths which were already formed at\nthe nomadic stage; a solar name must have been given to his murderer,\njust as in the dialectic variant of Hebhel (Abel), namely, Y\u00e2bh\u00e2l\n(Jabal), his father Lemekh (Lemech) is named as the murderer. Later, at\nthe stage of the Myth of Civilisation, the murderer of Abel is called\n\u1e32ayin (Cain), the smith and inventor of agricultural implements, whose\nname is indeed also a solar appellation, but one that already belonged\nto the Myth of Civilisation. The same case occurs in the story of Jacob.\nOriginally, in the nomadic myth, Jacob\u2019s hostile brother was called\nEd\u00f4m, the Red, the Sun. For this name the Myth of Civilisation\nsubstituted \u02bf\u00cas\u00e2v (if we explain this as the Worker, the Accomplisher;\nsee p. 139);\u2014again a name which is essentially solar, but could arise\nonly with the Myth of Civilisation.\n\nIn this wise the Myth of Civilisation, starting from the general ideas\nof the agriculturist, opened a wider circle of vision in the notions\nheld of the Sun, and with the new enlarged circle created new names for\nthe Sun, which then drove into obscurity some older appellations\nbelonging to the primitive form of the myth.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. Before we conclude our diagnosis of the Myth of Civilisation, we\nwill cast a momentary glance at the forms in which this group of myths\nshows itself in other Semitic nations. The founder of civilisation in\nthe Assyrian and Babylonian myth is the Oannes of Berosus. \u2018_During the\ndaytime_ Oannes held intercourse with men, taught them sciences and\narts, the building of cities and temples, laws and the introduction of\nthe measurement of planes; further, he showed them how to sow and reap:\nin a word, he instructed them in everything necessary to social life, so\nthat after his time they had nothing new to learn.\u2019 In a word, Oannes is\nthe teacher of civilisation and inventor of all art and sciences, all\nlaw and order. That this founder of civilisation has a solar character,\nlike similar heroes in all other nations, is shown in the very next\nwords of Berosus: \u2018_But when the Sun set, Oannes fell into the sea,\nwhere he used to pass the night_.\u2019 Here evidently only the Sun can be\nmeant, who in the evening dips into the sea, and comes forth again in\nthe morning and passes the day on the dry land in the company of men. He\nis half fish half man, and in this respect identical with the\nCanaanitish D\u00e2g\u00f4n, whose name denotes \u2018Fish.\u2019 D\u00e2g\u00f4n also is, with the\nAssyrians as well as with the Canaanites, the god of fertility of the\nsoil and founder of civilisation. He is \u2018Inventor of the plough,\ndistributor of grain, protector of the cornfield;\u2019 and in Assyria we\nfind him represented with his head covered by a _horned_ cap.[576] The\ncombination of the two characters is to be explained, not by supposing\nthat the idea of the god of fertility was connected with that of the\nrapid propagation of the fish, but by the solar meaning given in\nmythology to the fish. It must not be overlooked that in this connexion\nthe fish is always spoken of as _rising out of the water_\u2014like the Sun,\nwho, having passed the night in the water, issues forth again in the\nmorning.\n\nWe see the same also in the extant Phenician myth of civilisation, which\nis narrated by the Sanchuniathon of Philo Herennius. Perverted and\nspoiled as the stories of the Phenicians may have been by the pen of the\nGreek author, who contemplated Phenician mythology through the medium of\nthe Greek cosmogony, corrupted and Hellenised as the proper names\nespecially are, yet these pieces of information are undoubtedly based on\nreal stories which were current among the Phenicians. It is a pity to\nlavish on them so much profound thought and symbolising combination as\nhas been done by Bunsen, Movers and many other scholars; but, on the\nother hand, it is an equal mistake to condemn the entire mass as a\nuseless forgery and declare it unworthy of attention in investigating\nPhenician antiquity. The real task is rather to penetrate the\nbewildering labyrinth of misunderstandings to the simple and original.\nThe confirmation given in the last few years by the cuneiform\ninscriptions to the _Babylonica_, which are referred to the reports of\nBerosus, ought to moderate any extreme scepticism on the subject of the\nPhenician affairs which are quoted from Sanchuniathon, Mochus and\nothers.\n\nThe Phenician Cosmogony of Philo Herennius says that Chrysoros, who as\nthe Opener, Navigator, and Smith has already appeared to us (pp. 98\u20139)\nto have a Solar character, was the progenitor of \u1f0c\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 or \u1f08\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 and\n\u1f08\u03b3\u03c1\u03cd\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, and says of these, \u2018From them are derived the agriculturists\nand those who hunt with dogs. These latter are also called \u1f08\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, or\nWanderers to and fro. From them are derived \u1f0c\u03bc\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 and \u039c\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, who taught\nmen how to found villages and feed herds.\u2019 This is only the Myth of\nCivilisation of the agriculturist again, which everywhere brings the\ncommencement of agriculture, the foundation of cities and civilisation,\ninto connexion with the Sun. As from Cain is descended Enoch, whose name\nis attached to the first city in the world, so from Chrysoros, the\nPhenician Cain, are derived those who first adapted their places of\nsojourn to the requirements of settled dwellings. In a word, the\ngenealogy only asserts that the Sun occasions the choice of fixed\ndwellings and consequently of agricultural life. But the fact that the\nhunting and nomadic life[577] is introduced together with the origin of\nagriculture, and that the first commencement of the one is put into\ncombination with the founders of the other, occasions some difficulty,\nwhich cannot be simply denied and put aside. Now it is certainly\npossible that the Myth of Civilisation among the Phenicians, in whose\nneighbourhood alongside of agricultural life nomadic life also was in\nfull force\u2014for their view extended over all Palestine and the valley of\nthe Jordan\u2014referred the origin even of the latter mode of life to the\nSun, as the founder of all social life. But it is also possible that\nwhat Philo asserts on a Phenician authority concerning nomads and\nhunters is founded on a misunderstanding of the original information.\nFor the sons of Chrysoros, the Sun, were evidently described as hunters\nand wanderers. Now _Hunter_ and _Wanderer_ are, as we have seen,\nattributes of the Sun, who shoots his rays at the monster of the storm,\nand is \u2018a fugitive and a vagabond,\u2019 engaged in a migration from east to\nwest. Cain is an exile and wanderer, but not a nomad. But through\nmisunderstanding the Solar hunter and wanderer may have been converted\ninto the founder of the hunting and nomadic life. Even Bunsen, though\nstarting from a different point of view and influenced by other\nconsiderations, designated this very passage as a perversion of the\nPhenician account, perpetrated by Philo and perfectly in accord with the\nsystem followed by him.[578] The original Phenician account must, no\ndoubt, have been different.\n\n\n\u00a7 5. Although Cain and Esau cannot possibly have been incorporated with\nthe old Hebrew mythology till the myth of the origin of civilisation was\nunfolded, yet they retain the mischievous and hostile character which\nthe nomadic myth always assigns to solar figures. This fact illustrates\nthe general observation which I made above (see p. 81) with especial\nreference to the Hebrews and Arabs\u2014that in many nations the\nconsciousness of an advance in passing on to the agricultural life is\nnever aroused, or only very late, and that they rather regard this\nadvance as retrogression and look back on the nomadic state as a more\nperfect one. Among the Hebrews, accordingly, the heroes of civilising\nagriculture, with the exception of Noah, take a position in the myth far\nless influential than similar heroes in other nations. The sympathetic\nlight in which Noah was regarded is closely connected with his position\nin the story of the Deluge, which was added at a very late period to the\nHebrew series of stories.\n\nTo understand this fact, however, we must cast another glance at the\noldest stage of Hebrew Religion, at which religion had not yet fully\nshaken itself free from mythology, but was closely united with it, and\nonly beginning to have a separate form. Whatever be the psychological\nfactors that produce the religious tendency in man\u2014an attitude of the\nsoul which can no longer be treated as congenital,\u2014it must be regarded\nas established and certain that the psychological process of the origin\nof religion, a process influenced only in its most advanced stages by\nethical and esthetic forces, is in the first instance developed out of\nthe older mental activity which resulted in the creation of myths. After\nthe exhaustion of the mental activity that forms myths, which is\nequivalent to the disappearance both of mythical productiveness and of\nvivid understanding of myths, men have no longer any consciousness of\nwhat may be called the etymology of the myth. Then the mythical figures\nbegin to be individualised; and parallel with this process runs the\nlinguistic phenomenon that polyonymy disappears and all the phases of\nmeaning previously expressed by separate names are combined in one or a\nfew. The various synonyms for Sun, Darkness, etc., which existed in the\nmyth, lose their significance; the different names for these natural\nphenomena, in each of which one feature or element of them was expressed\nin language, succumb to one single name, which then comprises in itself\nall their features and elements. The names Helios and Shemesh take the\nplace of all other designations created in myths for the phenomenon of\nthe Sun. These other designations, e.g. on Hebrew ground Jephthah,\nAsher, Edom and others, forfeit the signification which they originally\nhad when myths were formed, and instead thereof are individualised.\nThese names become personal names, and the stories of which they are the\nsubjects become events of society. Thus from physical stories arise\nstories of gods and heroes; thus the nomenclature of the Sun and the\nDarkness produces a host of names of gods and heroes. For the personages\nwho are thus imagined are powerful celestials, and the forgotten\nprocesses of which the myth spoke preserve for some time their heavenly\nscene of action.\n\nThis process of transformation of myths is inevitable, because bound up\nwith the laws of development of the human mind and human speech; at a\ncertain stage of the development of mind and language, the myth must\nbecome theology. But the process is gradual, so that the commencing\nstages of theological development do not break loose at once from the\nmythical consciousness, and the latter loses its colour gradually before\nit disappears altogether. A stage of this kind, at which Myth is turning\ninto Religion, is most clearly exhibited by the Myth of Civilisation.\nSome bit of divine nature or peculiar personality always cleaves to the\nhero of civilisation; and some such myths actually live long unimpaired\nafter the greater number have been metamorphosed into theology or\nreligion. Thus, for instance, among the Hebrews the origin of religion\nis to be traced in its germ as far back as the nomadic age. Even at that\nstage, though of course towards the end of it, we observe the Hebrew\nmyth of the beneficent sky of night and rain turning into religion. For\na searching investigation of the religion of the nomadic Hebrews proves\nthe object of their veneration to have been the dark overcast sky,\nconnected (where it is not distinctly declared) with mythical figures of\nundoubtedly nocturnal character. I must briefly refer to what was\nindicated above (pp. 72, 73) of the worship of the night-sky and the\nrain among the Arabs. The religious stage of the nomadic Hebrews is\nstill to be recognised in the reminiscences, transmitted by theocratic\nhistorians, of that age, which was to them a forty years\u2019 wandering in\nthe desert preceding the conquest of Palestine. To the same stock, as\nsources for the reconstruction of this religious stage, belong also some\naccounts contained in the Prophetical books; and they cannot but be\nconsidered historically credible\u2014of course in the sense in which such\nreminiscences must be critically estimated as sources of history. For it\nis certain that such recollections lived on a very long time in the\nnations of antiquity, and that, if the special tendency of the reporter\nbe stripped off, they may yield objective matter of history.\n\nThe most important datum of this kind is the question of the Prophet of\nTekoa, which refers to a great expanse of history\u2014a passage which has\nspurred many learned men to attempt ingenious interpretations.[579]\n\nDid ye offer unto me sacrifices and offerings in the desert forty years,\nO house of Israel? Did ye bear the huts [read Sukk\u00f4th] of your king, and\nKiyy\u00fbn (Chiun) your idol, the star [read k\u00f4kh\u00e2bh], your god whom ye had\nmade to yourselves? (Amos V. 25, 26.)\n\nIt is evident from this important passage that the nomadic Hebrews\nworshipped their god or gods by huts, and that one among the objects of\ntheir worship was a Star, let alone what star Kiyy\u00fbn may be, whether\nidentical with the Arabic keyv\u00e2n, or some other. Thus, so far as we can\ninfer from the Prophet\u2019s word, their divine worship was paid to the\nnight-sky. The nomad looks on the night-sky as a pasture where the\nherdsman (for the mythical figures of the night-sky are mostly regarded\nby him as herdsmen) lets his cattle feed; and it is easy to conceive\nthat at the theological stage he venerates in huts the mythical figure\nnow converted into a god, ascribing to him the same dwelling which he\noccupies on high in the sky. The most important feast of the nomadic\nHebrews was the Feast of Sukk\u00f4th, or Tabernacles, which probably stands\nin close connexion with these Sukk\u00f4th of a god, and at the agricultural\nstage became a Harvest-feast. But even at that stage the connexion of\nthe feast with nomadic life and the past nomadism of the nation itself,\nlived long in its memory (see Lev. XXIII. 43). That which they\nworshipped in the huts was not the Sun,[580] the bright sky of day, but\nk\u00f4kh\u00e2bh, a Star, doubtless no particular star, but only the starry\nheaven in general. For the rain, the most beneficent element to the\nnomad, was identified with the stars, i.e. with the sky at night. In the\nview of the ancient Arabs there were also Hyades in the starry heaven;\nwe meet in poetry with the expression mar\u00e2b\u00ee\u02bf al-nuj\u00fbm \u2018spring rain of\nthe stars\u2019 (_Mu\u02bfalla\u1e33\u00e2_ of Leb\u00eed, v. 4). A familiar phrase in the speech\nof the nomadic Arabs is \u2018the stars have brought rain.\u2019[581] Mo\u1e25ammed\nforbids the Moslims to express their common idea of the origin of the\nrain by their usual phrase mu\u1e6dirn\u00e2 binau\u02be ka\u1e0f\u00e2 \u2018we have received rain\nfrom such and such a star,\u2019 though he allows the connexion of the rain\nwith the stars, and only insists on the recognition of All\u00e2h as first\ncause, while the nau\u02be is the immediate origin.[582] Similarly the\nMohammedan Arabs were forbidden to call the rainbow the bow of the\nThunder-god \u1e32oza\u1e25.[583] The dew, also, has a connexion with the anw\u00e2\u02be\n\u2018stars\u2019 (plural of nau\u02be). It is not without interest to find this view\nin a Jewish-Arabic writer of the middle ages.[584] The worship of the\nk\u00f4kh\u00e2bh \u2018star\u2019 by the Hebrew nomads must therefore have a special\nconnexion with the rain. Ancient mankind did not distinguish between the\ncloudless sky which grows dark at night, and the sky gloomy with clouds\nand rain by day (see supra, p. 42). He notices the darkness only, not\nthe various times of day or night at which it occurs. Hence a sunless\nsky in general is treated as bringing rain. To show what connexion he\nimagined to subsist between the _huts_ (sukk\u00f4th) and the rainy sky, I\nwill quote a verse of a hymn to Jahveh, attributed to David, and said to\nhave been sung on his deliverance from the power of Saul:\n\nHe made darkness round about him into _huts_ (Sukk\u00f4th), collections of\nwater, clouds of the sky. (2 Sam. XXII. 12.)\n\nThe various reading for the expression chashrath mayim \u2018collections of\nwater,\u2019 which is preserved in Ps. XVIII. 12, where this hymn is given in\na somewhat corrupt and less original form, deserves attention\nnevertheless. The words are cheshekhath mayim \u2018darkness of water\u2019 or\n\u2018rain-bringing darkness.\u2019\n\nThe more we study the information preserved to us on the religion of the\nnomadic Hebrews, the stronger is our conviction that it consisted in a\nveneration of the sky of clouds and rain, and was developed immediately\nfrom the elements of the nomadic myth. We read that in the desert God\nwent before the Hebrews _as_ a pillar of cloud by day and _as_ a pillar\nof fire by night, and showed them the way (Ex. XIII. 21);[585] that he\n_as a pillar of cloud_ came between the pursued Hebrews and the pursuing\nEgyptians (Ex. XIV. 19, 20) by night (for the day breaks soon after, Ex.\nXIV. 24); that he appeared to Aaron and Miriam in the pillar of cloud\n(Num. XII. 5); that, as the later psalmists, preserving the theological\nphraseology of ancient times, say (Ps. XCIX. 7), he speaks with his\nProphet as a pillar of cloud. But what need is there to enumerate all\nthe passages which speak of the God of the wandering Hebrews in\nconnexion with the pillar of cloud, and describe his turning away as the\nretreat of the cloud, or to show that the cloud was retained in the\npopular tradition of a later monotheistical age as kebh\u00f4d Yahwe \u2018the\nglory of Jahveh?\u2019[586] It at least appears from them that the nomadic\nHebrews attached their religious veneration to the Cloud; of which one\nof the latest relics is preserved in the name \u02bfAnany\u00e2 (Ananias), i.e.\n\u2018Cloud-God,\u2019 and another in the phrase that God \u2018rides upon a cloud.\u2019\nAnother feature of the nomadic religion is expressed in al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee\u2019s\nwords that \u2018the ancient Arabs paid divine honours to a white lamb, and\nwhen the wolf came and devoured the lamb, they chose another lamb to\nreceive the same honours.\u2019[587] From what was said above (p. 165) with\nreference to Rachel, it is not difficult to perceive that this white\nlamb is only a bright cloud like a lamb. This deification of clouds is\nalso found elsewhere. The people of Bonny on the west coast of Africa\ncomprise their idea of the Deity in the name Sh\u00fbr or the cloudy\nsky;[588] and if the learned Italian Assyriologist Felix Finzi[589] is\nright, we find among the chief gods of the Assyrians the Cloud, which\nlooks like a relic of the ancient time, when instead of the solar powers\nthe Assyrians deemed those of the dark sky worthy of their worship. This\nscholar wishes to explain the Assyrian divine name Anu as etymologically\nidentical with the Hebrew \u02bf\u00c2n\u00e2n \u2018cloud\u2019 which certainly well suits the\ntwo epithets of the deity, \u2018Lord of Darkness\u2019 and \u2018Gatherer of\nShades.\u2019[590] In this case, however, the identity of Anu with the Oannes\nof Berosus could not be maintained, as the solar character of Oannes is\nundoubted; but this identification rests on a very slender base, and\nleads to no better understanding either of Anu or of Oannes.\n\nWith the worship of the Clouds is naturally united that of the Rain,\nwhich we find deified by many primitive nations. We find this, for\ninstance, in the Akra people of the Gold Coast of West Africa. They\nexpress the question \u2018Will it rain?\u2019 by the words \u2018Will God come?\u2019[591]\nAmong the heathen of the tribe of Baghirmi in Central Africa, with whom\nDr. Nachtigall, lately returned from that region, has made us\nacquainted, the name Deity is identical with the designation of\nStorm.[592] In the language of the Wamasai in Eastern Africa the\nfeminine noun A\u00ef (with the article Enga\u00ef) has the two significations God\nand Rain.[593] This deification of rain and storm is moreover identical\nwith Serpent-worship, wherever the latter occurs. For the adoration of\nthe Serpent and Dragon is derived from the mythical conception which\nregarded rain as a \u2018fluid serpent\u2019 (see supra, p. 186); and wherever it\nis met with at a more advanced stage of civilisation it is a residuum\nfrom that stage at which men knew no more beneficent power than the dark\novercast sky, the rain, the dragon that opposes the sun B\u00eal. The\nEgyptian and Indian theological ideas of the serpent are examples of\nsuch residua of the ancient nomadic views. Where a solar worship has\ngrown up, either the old conception of the beneficent serpent continues\nto exist alongside of the new views, without being understood or\nharmonised with these, or else the defeat of the Serpent by the victory\nof the Sun becomes a feature of the new religion, and the Serpent\nappears as a hostile figure. So, for instance, in Persia and elsewhere.\nMax M\u00fcller actually opposes the very method of Comparative Mythology\nwhich he himself introduced and maintained so brilliantly, when he\ndeclares \u2018There is an Aryan, there is a Semitic, there is a Turanian,\nthere is an African serpent, and who but an evolutionist would dare to\nsay that all these conceptions came from one and the same original\nsource, that they are all held together by one traditional chain?\u2019[594]\nNo doubt this single chain of tradition is a perfectly unscientific\nassumption, but none the less does the same original source serve as\norigin of serpent-worship everywhere, namely, the old mythical\nconception; and the varieties of view that we meet are to be classified\nnot according to ethnological races, but by historical stages of\ncivilisation. Certainly we shall at length have to cease seeking a\nmotive for the worship of the Serpent where the symbolical school have\npersistently sought it even to the most recent times\u2014in the \u2018Conception\nof the deep wisdom of the serpent and of the mystic powers which are\nsaid to belong to its nature.\u2019 The Serpent-worship as a form of religion\nis a further development of the mythical expressions which describe the\nrain as a serpent, made when these expressions had become\nunintelligible; in the same way as the worship of crocodiles, cats,\netc., are traced back to a solar myth, the meaning of which had been\nforgotten.[595] The apparently mutually contradictory significations\nwhich are attached to the serpent in the myth and the worship must be\ntraced back, not to opposite views held by different races, but to\nvarying modes of understanding the myth, which might all emanate from\nthe idea of the serpent. How often in the mythology of one and the same\npeople we find the same object employed for the apperception of most\ndifferent, or even opposite, things!\n\nThe adoration of the Serpent is also demonstrable of the Hebrews when\nnomadising in the desert; for only in this sense can the Brazen Serpent\nbe understood, the adoration of which was commenced by the Hebrews of\nthe desert and continued to the latest times (Num. XXI. 9, 2 Kings\nXVIII. 4). It also deserves notice that that Hebrew tribe which had from\nthe earliest times the care of religious affairs and provided the\nworship called itself \u2018Sons of the Serpent,\u2019 Ben\u00ea L\u00eav\u00ee[596] (see supra,\np. 183), and that it was these who fell upon their compatriots when on\nthe exodus from Egypt they were about to introduce a solar element into\ntheir religion by the adoration of the Golden Calf.[597] It was the Sons\nof Levi, the priests of the ancient religion of the nomads, who defended\nconservatism, and would not allow the solar bull-worship to raise its\nhead.[598]\n\nAccordingly, the tribal designation \u2018Sons of the Serpent\u2019 belongs to the\nlong list of such names which are derived from animals.[599] Lubbock and\nTylor, especially, have put this species of tribal nomenclature into\nconnexion with the so-called Totemism; but in any case it is natural to\nassume that the original relation of the animal to the origin of the\ntribe or nation which claims it as its ancestor is purely mythological.\n\n\n\u00a7 6. Thus, then, the most ancient religion of the Hebrews in the desert\nwas derived immediately from the myths of the nomads. To complete the\nabove exposition, it is now only needful to refer to the traces of Lunar\nworship, which were treated in a previous chapter (pp. 158\u2013160).\n\nNot till after the entrance into Palestine, i.e. after the transition\nfrom nomadic wanderings in the desert to a settled agricultural life,\ndoes Solar worship appear among the Hebrews, chiefly in the northern\npart of the land; but even there it is only introduced in imitation of\nthe rites of the neighbouring Canaanitish tribes, which, having been\nlong settled in Palestine as agriculturists, had formed a complete solar\nritual. The Hebrews brought no such system into the conquered land; on\nthe contrary, their religion was, as we have seen, of a purely nomadic\ncharacter, having its centre in the adoration of the dark sky of night.\nThat it was so is evident also from the fact that the solar worship\nemployed by the Egyptians had no attraction for the people of Israel\nduring their residence in that country. Accordingly in this point the\nHebrews were radically different from other tribes that had immigrated\ninto Egypt, which are generally comprised under the common name Hyks\u00f4s.\nFor in some of these tribes a fully developed solar form of religion,\nincluding even the wildest excesses of the service of Moloch, is found\nto have been adopted even as early as their residence in Egypt.[600]\n\nThe objects of the adoration of the nomadic Hebrews were the cloudy sky\nand the rainy sky.[601] But not only was direct worship addressed to the\nCloud and the Rain; their will was also regarded as a revelation of\ndestiny, and consulted. At first any nomad would look to the Cloud and\nthe Serpent, to learn what the gods wished; but at a later time such\nknowledge generally becomes the property of certain persons\u2014perhaps\noriginally a sort of Rain-makers, like the Mganga in Eastern Africa. The\npersons among the Hebrews who understood this revelation and could exert\ninfluence by magic on the higher powers were the me\u02bf\u00f4nen\u00eem and\nmenac\u1e25ash\u00eem, the \u2018Observers of Clouds and Serpents,\u2019 as mentioned\nregularly together (Deut. XVIII. 10). In the same book of law in which\nthe adoration of the se\u02bf\u00eer\u00eem is strictly prohibited, it is also\nforbidden to observe clouds and serpents (Lev. XIX. 26). I am well aware\nthat the connexion of these two verbs with the words for cloud and\nserpent is denied by some authorities of note;[602] but the objections\nraised in reference to the first at least lead to the establishment of\nnothing more tenable.\n\nStill there is another question which ought to come under our notice\nhere, the answer to which shall form the conclusion of this chapter.\nWhen the nomad Hebrew\u2019s Myth of the victory of the night-sky over the\nday-sky, or of the unjust violence to which the dark sky falls a victim,\nwas converted into a nomadic Religion, in which the mythical figures\nwere individualised and adored as great powers; was not adoration then\naddressed to the _names_ which had been assigned to the night-sky in the\nmyth of the nomads? In other words, were not the deities themselves\ncalled Abram, Jacob, etc., just as among the Aryans the mythical figures\nwhen converted into gods were called by the same names as they had in\nthe myth? For it was mainly the appellations becoming unintelligible\nthat occasioned the process of transformation, and so it would be\nexpected that in the resulting religion these names would occupy the\ncentre. It is, indeed, the consequence which we should necessarily infer\n_a priori_ from all that has been said. We should infer that those names\nof the sky of night and rain, of which the myth of the nomad was chiefly\ncomposed, at the theological stage became names of theological meaning.\nYet this does not appear at all clearly in the Old Testament books. The\nreason is, that most of the historical books belonging to the Bible are\ncoloured by a theocratic conception, and as literary works are advanced\neven beyond that stage of the national mind at which the mythical\nfigures were converted into _Ancestors_. For not only religion, but\nhistory also, is formed out of myths at a certain stage of their\ndevelopment. But the mythical names really belonged first to theological\nnomenclature before they became historical, as names of Ancestors. This\nis proved by the fact, which has been mentioned already for another\npurpose, on which Dozy, in his book on Jewish-Arabic Religious History,\nhas with excellent tact laid emphasis,[603] that none of these mythical\nnames occurs as a human name in the whole course of ancient history, and\neven in modern history not till late,[604] any more than an Indian would\nbe named S\u00fbrya, Ushas or Dahan\u00e2, or a Roman Jupiter or Saturn, or a\nGreek Herakles or Aphrodite. This proves that the mythical names of the\nHebrew nomads possessed a super-human significance before they became\nhistorical names.\n\nYet there is still a fact belonging to the latest age which shows that\nthe memory of a former connexion of theological ideas with the names\nAbram and Jacob had not even then altogether vanished. The great Prophet\nof the Hebrew people in the Babylonian Captivity, whose name is unknown\nto us only that we may admire the more his noble soaring spirit, cries\nin a prayer to Jahveh:\n\n For thou [Jahveh] art our Father;\n Abraham knew us not,\n And Israel [Jacob] acknowledged us not;\n Thou, Jahveh, art our Father,\n Our Redeemer, whose name was from eternity.\u2014Is. LXIII. 16.\n\nIt is obvious that here the names of Abraham and Jacob are _opposed_ to\nthat of Jahveh. Therefore it is Jahveh, not Abraham; Jahveh, not Jacob!\nJahveh is the omniscient redeemer and protector of the people Israel;\nthe others take no care of it. Can we read in this opposition of names\nanything else but that the writer wishes to contrast the idea of a God\nrecognised as the only true with the memory of something different,\nwhich ages ago passed for divine, but is unworthy of adoration now, when\nthe Prophet brings forward the _omniscience_ of Jahveh as an\nirrefragable argument for the exclusiveness of his divinity? I think\nnot. And it is not stated without a purpose that Jahveh is the redeemer\nof the Hebrew nation \u2018from eternity\u2019 (m\u00ea\u02bf\u00f4l\u00e2m), i.e. even from that age\nin which to the popular mind Abraham and Jacob towered over the range of\nhumanity into the sphere of the gods. We ought further to notice the\nchange of the names Abhr\u00e2m and Ya\u02bfa\u1e33\u00f4bh into Abhr\u00e2h\u00e2m and Yisr\u00e2\u02be\u00eal (Gen.\nXVII. 5; XXXII. 29 [28]). The motive alleged for the change of Abhr\u00e2m\n\u2018High Father\u2019 is, that the historical character of the patriarch as\nAncestor may be brought into the foreground: \u2018for I have made thee\nfather of multitudes of nations.\u2019 To Jacob the later _ethnographical_\nname of the people is given. Thus the memory of that to which the\nancient Hebrews had paid divine honours was to be suppressed as a\nthought of something divine but hostile to Jahveh; and its place was to\nbe occupied by the memory of the _Ancestors_ of the nation, in which\ncharacter the Patriarchs are warmly commended to the people by this very\nprophet (LI. 1, 2). We must next explain what was the impulse that drove\nthe Hebrews to form out of the nomenclature of their ancient myth the\nnames of their ancestors, or in other words to translate a considerable\nportion of their mythological phraseology into ethnological.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 548:\n\n An interesting Arabic parallel to this occurs in Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, III. 496.\n Tha\u1e33\u00eef and al-Nacha\u02bf, who with their herds were migrating together,\n determine to separate: \u2018So one said to the other: Assuredly this land\n can never support both me and thee. If thou goest to the west, then I\n will go to the east; and if I go to the west, then do thou go to the\n east. Then said Tha\u1e33\u00eef, Well, I will choose the west. Then said\n al-Nacha\u02bf, Then I go to the east.\u2019 _Ibid._, p. 498, occurs an equally\n curious arrangement between two nomad tribes.\n\nFootnote 549:\n\n _De vita solit._ I. 10. Inventores artium quarundam post mortem\n divinitatis honore cultos audivimus, grate quidem potius quam pie.\n Nulla enim est pietas hominis qua Deus offenditur, sed erga memoriam\n de humano genere bene meritorum inconsulta gratitudo mortalium,\n humanis honoribus non contenta, usque ad sacrilegas processit\n ineptias. Hinc Apollinem cithara, hinc eundem ipsum atque Aesculapium\n medicina, Saturnum, Liberumque et Cererem agricultura, Vulcanum\n fabrica deos fecit.\n\nFootnote 550:\n\n _Ausland_, 1875, p. 219 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 551:\n\n Sir G. Wilkinson on _Herodotus_, II. 79, note 5.\n\nFootnote 552:\n\n Even Herder compared together these two sources of information on the\n story of Jemsh\u00eed, in the Appendix to vol. I. of his writings on\n Philosophy and History.\n\nFootnote 553:\n\n _Geschichte der Amerikanischen Urreligionen_, Basle 1867, p. 423. This\n myth of civilisation is given also by Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, I.\n 318 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 554:\n\n See Dr. Robert Hartmann, _Die Nigritier: eine\n anthropologisch-ethnologische Monographie_, Berlin 1876, Thl. I. p.\n 176.\n\nFootnote 555:\n\n Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, New York 1868, p. 130.\n\nFootnote 556:\n\n Otto Henne-Am-Rhyn, _Die deutsche Volkssage, etc._, p. 281 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 557:\n\n _Ibid._, p. 285, the author says on the other hand: \u2018The blind sister\n is of course always the invisible new moon, the half-black and\n half-white the half moon, the quite white the full moon.\u2019\n\nFootnote 558:\n\n See Hellwald, _Ueber Gyn\u00e4kokratie im alten Amerika_, third art. in\n _Ausland_ for 1871, no. 44, p. 1158. In the language of the Algonkins\n the ideas Night, Death, Cold, Sleep, Water, and Moon are expressed by\n one and the same word.\n\nFootnote 559:\n\n _A vogul f\u00f6ld \u00e9s n\u00e9p, Reguly Antal hagyom\u00e1nyaib\u00f3l_, Pest 1864, p. 139.\n\nFootnote 560:\n\n In the Hottentot story it is the Hare (on his solar significance see\n supra p. 118) that is represented as the origin of death, in\n opposition to the Moon (Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, II.\n 342).\n\nFootnote 561:\n\n See the article \u2018Une gen\u00e8se vogule,\u2019 in Ujfalvy\u2019s _Revue de\n Philologie_, Paris 1874, livr. 1. The original text and a Hungarian\n translation are given by P. Hunfalvy in his lately quoted work, p.\n 119\u2013134.\n\nFootnote 562:\n\n _Ausland_, 1875, p. 951 _et seqq._\n\nFootnote 563:\n\n Whitney, _Language and the Study of Language_, London 1867, p. 346.\n\nFootnote 564:\n\n _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p. 305.\n\nFootnote 565:\n\n Waitz, l.c. I. 464 _note_. Among other examples Waitz quotes this: \u2018In\n Mexico Huitzlipochtli, was born of a woman who took to her bosom a\n feather-ball is a solar designation, is not easily determined.\u2019 In\n connexion with it I will only mention that Shakspeare in one passage\n calls the sun a \u2018burning crest.\u2019\n\n But even this night,\u2014whose black contagious breath\n Already smokes about the burning crest\n Of the old, feeble, and day-wearied sun,\u2014\n Even this ill night, your breathing shall expire.\u2014_King John_, V. 4.\n\nFootnote 566:\n\n Man\u1e6di\u1e33 al-\u1e6deyr, ed. Garcin de Tassy, p. 58 (from a communication of my\n friend Dr. W. Bacher).\n\nFootnote 567:\n\n By the Red the Sun is surely unquestionably to be understood, and not,\n as Max M\u00fcller says (_Introduction to the Science of Religion_, p. 64),\n the Earth.\n\nFootnote 568:\n\n It should at the same time be noticed that in Arabic, in which, as in\n Hebrew, men are usually called ban\u00fb Adam, the expression ban\u00fb \u1e24aww\u00e2\u02bea\n (sons of Eve) also occurs; _e.g._ in a verse of the Kumeyt (_A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_,\n XV. 124; wa-cheynu ban\u00ee \u1e24aww\u00e2\u02bea), in a poem of Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 al-Ma\u02bfarr\u00ee,\n I. 96. 1, of al-Murta\u1e0d\u00ee in the _Keshk\u00f9l_ of al-\u02bf\u00c2mil\u00ee, p. 169.\n\nFootnote 569:\n\n _Ursprung der menschlichen Sprache und Vernunft_, II. 42.\n\nFootnote 570:\n\n See Excursus M.\n\nFootnote 571:\n\n _Die Kit\u00e2b al aw\u00e2\u02beil der Araber_, Halle 1867; congratulatory article\n on occasion of the meeting of the German Oriental Society at Halle.\n\nFootnote 572:\n\n I know this work (entitled Mu\u1e25\u00e2\u1e0darat al-aw\u00e2\u02beil wa-mus\u00e2marat\n al-aw\u00e2chir) from a manuscript of it in the public Viceregal Library at\n Cairo. In the catalogue of the year 1289, p. 92 _antepenult_, it is\n erroneously entered with the title Muchta\u1e63ar al-aw\u00e2\u02beil wal-aw\u00e2chir.\n\nFootnote 573:\n\n al-Ma\u1e33\u1e33ar\u00ee, _Analectes de l\u2019historie et de la litt\u00e9rature des Arabes\n d\u2019Espagne_, II. 69. The aw\u00e2\u02beil are there called u\u1e63\u00fbl al-ashy\u00e2.\n\nFootnote 574:\n\n A general view of this literature can now be obtained from Ibn\n al-Ned\u00eem\u2019s _Fihrist_.\n\nFootnote 575:\n\n The name Yiss\u00e2-sekh\u00e2r (Issachar) must also fall under our\n consideration here, if we treat it as a Solar name (Day-labourer). See\n supra, p. 177.\n\nFootnote 576:\n\n See Duncker, _Geschichte des Alterthums_, 1874, I. 206, 266.\n\nFootnote 577:\n\n Can the Semitic \u00f4hel \u2018Tent of the Nomads\u2019 be concealed in the word\n \u0391\u03bb\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2?\n\nFootnote 578:\n\n _Egypt\u2019s Place in Universal History_, IV. 223.\n\nFootnote 579:\n\n Besides German scholars, Dutch orientalists and historians of religion\n especially have written very ably on the passage in Amos; the latest\n of whom, Tiele, in his _Vergelijkende Geschiedenis_, pp. 539 _et\n seq._, mentions in a note the most prominent Dutch labours on the\n subject.\n\nFootnote 580:\n\n No weight must be attached to the word malkekhem \u2018your king,\u2019 in which\n many have tried to find a datum for the high antiquity of the worship\n of Moloch by the Hebrews; for the suffix shows that the word cannot be\n taken as M\u00f4lekh, the name of a god. And the worship of that God\n appears everywhere as one borrowed from the Canaanites.\n\nFootnote 581:\n\n _E.g._ in the following fragment of a poem: \u2018We lived in Chaff\u00e2n in\n company with a people, may God give them rain by the constellation of\n the Fishes (sa\u1e33\u00e2hum All\u00e2h min al-nau\u02be nau\u02be al-sim\u00e2keyn), then may a\n constellation give them abundant water (faraww\u00e2hum nau\u02be), [a\n constellation] whose shining spreads light abroad\u2019 (in Freytag,\n _Darstellung der arabischen Verskunst_, p. 253).\n\nFootnote 582:\n\n See Lane in the _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._, 1849, III. 97. Krehl,\n _Vorislamische Religion der Araber_, p. 9.\n\nFootnote 583:\n\n _Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt_, IV. 85. 19. _T\u00e2j al-\u02bf\u00e2r\u00fbs_, II. 209.\n\nFootnote 584:\n\n Sa\u02bfadia, who translates Job XXXVIII. 28, egl\u00ea \u1e6d\u00e2l \u2018store-houses of\n dew,\u2019 by the Arabic anw\u00e2\u02be \u2018stars,\u2019 Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 21.\n\nFootnote 585:\n\n See Num. XIV. 14, where before the two pillars are mentioned it is\n only said that the _cloud_ stood over them.\n\nFootnote 586:\n\n For Hebraists I note that I take the \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc be in be\u02bfamm\u00fbd \u02bf\u00e2n\u00e2n as _Beth\n essentiae_.\n\nFootnote 587:\n\n _\u1e24ay\u00e2t al-\u1e25ayw\u00e2n_, II. 52.\n\nFootnote 588:\n\n Bastian, _Geographische und ethnographische Bilder_, p. 169, and some\n passages in books of African travel quoted by Waitz, _Anthropologie\n der Naturv\u00f6lker_, II. 169.\n\nFootnote 589:\n\n _Ricerche per lo studio dell\u2019 antichit\u00e0 assira_, Turin 1872, p. 467.\n\nFootnote 590:\n\n Tiele, _Vergelijkende Geschiedenis_, p. 301, however, calls this last\n epithet \u2018much too general to draw any conclusion from.\u2019\n\nFootnote 591:\n\n Lazarus Geiger, _Ursprung und Entwickelung der menschlichen Sprach und\n Vernunft_, I. 346.\n\nFootnote 592:\n\n In Petermann\u2019s _Geogr. Mittheilungen_, 1874, XX. 330, pt. 9.\n\nFootnote 593:\n\n K. Andree, _Forschungsreisen etc._, II. 362.\n\nFootnote 594:\n\n _The Academy_, 1874, p. 548, col. 2.\n\nFootnote 595:\n\n See Excursus D.\n\nFootnote 596:\n\n Accordingly this appellation belongs to the same category as those\n which are noticed above, p. 175. In genealogical notes elsewhere also\n the Serpent occurs as ancestor; I need only mention the case which\n stands nearest to our subject in prehistoric Arabia\u2014that of al-Af\u02bfa b.\n al-Af\u02bfa, \u2018the Viper,\u2019 head of a branch of the people of Jurhum, Ibn\n \u02bfAbd\u00fbn, p. 71 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 597:\n\n On the solar significance of the Bull-worship see Kuenen, _Religion of\n Israel_, I. 236 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 598:\n\n I believe the historical narrative in Ex. XXXII. 26\u201329 is to be taken\n in this sense. It is solar worship that is forcing its way into the\n strictly nomadic religion of the Hebrews, and the Levites are\n guardians of the nomadic religion.\n\nFootnote 599:\n\n See Bastian in the _Zeitschr. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, 1868, V. 153.\n\nFootnote 600:\n\n Ebers, _Aegypten und die B\u00fccher Moses_, I. 245 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 601:\n\n On the adoration of the night-sky a passage of the Midr\u00e2sh should be\n consulted (Mechilt\u00e2, ed. Friedmann, fol. 68 a), in which the\n possibility of a dem\u00fbth ch\u00f4shekh \u2018an idol of Darkness,\u2019 is assumed.\n\nFootnote 602:\n\n Most recently by Ewald, _Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott_, I. 234 _et\n seq._ On the purpose and importance of the interpretation of winds and\n clouds among the Babylonians, see Lenormant, _La divination et la\n science des pr\u00e9sages chez les Chald\u00e9ens_, Paris 1875, pp. 64\u201368.\n\nFootnote 603:\n\n _De Izraelieten te Mekka_, Haarlem 1864, p. 29.\n\nFootnote 604:\n\n See my remark in the _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._, 1874, XXVIII. 309.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n _INFLUENCE OF THE AWAKING NATIONAL IDEA ON THE TRANSFORMATION\n OF THE HEBREW MYTH._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. The nomadic stage of the Hebrew tribes reached its end at the\nmoment when a large part of them gained a land for themselves on the\nright bank of the river Yard\u00ean (Jordan); and that is the true beginning\nof the History of the Hebrews. Nomadism holds in itself nothing\nessential to the world\u2019s history. Hence the nomadic age of most great\nnations fades away into the vague, and there are at most separate and\nunimportant reminiscences by each tribe of its \u2018days of battle,\u2019 which\ngive the historian any fixed points for the construction of his picture.\nThere is scarcely any other nomad people that has had greater\nvicissitudes in its changeful life than the Arabic tribes: yet they\nscarcely afford any fixed points when we try to survey their history.\nFor it is not tied to any definite limited soil; no geographical unity\nruns throughout it. A true national history is inseparable from one\ncountry, which in peace presents the conditions necessary for the\ndevelopment of civilisation, and in war offers an object for the\nenthusiasm of assailants and defenders. There can be no history without\na definite land to which the events of history cling. The nomad cares\nless for a particular territory than for his goods and chattels, when he\ngoes to war.[605] The Desert, and the roamer who roves over its broad\nsurface, have no history proper. Only isolated vague memories, such as\ncan attach themselves to a great geographical territory, are at our\ncommand as points of support for the history of the Hebrew nomads. Their\nproper history begins with the conquest of Canaan. This conquest was by\nno means, as is still often assumed, a program of political\nreorganisation, long nourished in the mind of the people. On the\ncontrary, the fact that we find the tribes on coming from Egypt (whence\nit cannot be seriously doubted that they came) engaged in roaming about\non the left side of the Jordan before they entered Palestine, proves\nthat the Hebrews did not dream of the prospect of exchanging their\nnomadic life for one in towns. In case they had any such intention, a\nway from Egypt to Palestine was always open to the people, independently\nof the route by sea, which could scarcely be thought of from the want of\nmeans and adequate preparation. They would have traversed the northern\npart of the desert al-T\u00eeh, aiming directly at Hebron, on nearly the same\ntrack as that taken by the Patriarch\u2019s family according to the Biblical\nnarrative in going from Canaan to Egypt. The theocratic historian\nhimself finds a difficulty here, and ascribes to Moses strategic reasons\nfor adopting another course: \u2018And El\u00f4h\u00eem led them not by the [regular]\nroad to the land of the Philistines, because it is near; for, thought\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem, [there is danger] lest the people should repent when they see\nwar, and return to Egypt\u2019 (Ex. XIII. 17).\n\nBut the fact is really that on leaving Egypt the people wished to\ncontinue in their old mode of life, roving from desert to desert,\nseeking out one pasture after another; they were indifferent to the\ncultivated side of the Jordan, and chose by preference the wild eastern\nside, that is to this day the scene of that restless Beduin life which\nruns continuously from the bank of the Euphrates to the Sherra\nmountains. Nomadism is the most conservative life imaginable. For\nhundreds and thousands of years this plain has been occupied by the same\ntribes, alternately binding themselves for mutual support against a\ncommon foe\u2014often even in modern times the townsmen, and quarrelling\namong themselves on the slightest provocation. A perfectly new tribe\nentering from other parts would have great difficulty in holding its\nground there; and there is no wonder that the nomadic Hebrews in the\ndesert east of the Jordan were driven by constant struggles further and\nfurther to the north, and, having at last discovered their\nself-protection to be impossible there, resolved to cross the Jordan and\ntry their fortune in the towns. Another circumstance pressed this\ndecision upon them. The further they pushed northwards, the nearer they\ncame to the great northern power which stopped further advance. Great\nkingdoms whose territories are bounded by deserts have never left these\ndeserts and their inhabitants alone, but have always been diligently\nengaged in the subjection of the desert tribes: it was so ages ago, and\nis so still. The wars of the Grand Turk against the Beduin-tribes in\nSyria, Palestine and Arabia, those of the North-African powers against\nthe nomadic tribes which form their boundaries, are historical\ncontinuations of political events of the very oldest times. The remark\nof Manetho, the Egyptian priest and historian, is therefore very good:\n\u2018According to the agreement they travelled from Egypt through the desert\nto Syria with their whole households and possessions, not less than\n240,000 souls. But in fear of the Empire of the Assyrians\u2014for these were\nthen masters of Asia\u2014they built a city in the land now called Judea,\u2019\netc.[606]\n\nHere comes that remarkable turning-point in the life of the Hebrew\npeople\u2014the abandonment of nomadic life and transition to the civilised\nlife of towns. The passage of the Jordan marks this turning-point. That\nriver is still the boundary-line of two stages of civilisation,\nnomad-life and town-life. Not the entire mass of the nation submitted to\nthese changes; we know that a large portion of it, remaining at a\nhalf-nomadic stage, declared itself averse to the removal, and preferred\nto stay on the left bank of the Jordan, which is the Nomad\u2019s paradise\u2014a\nplain blessed with splendid pasture and fine woods, of which the Bedaw\u00ee\neven now says \u2018Thou wilt find no land like Bel\u1e33\u00e2.\u2019 The Biblical document\ngives the exact name of the portion of the people which resisted the\ntransition to town-life; they are described as the sons of Reuben, the\nsons of Gad, and a part of the tribe of Manasseh. We have no right to\ndecide how much historical truth there is in the contract between the\ntwo sections of the nation, by which the larger only gave its consent to\nthe practice of cattle-breeding east of the Jordan by the smaller on\ncondition that the latter would render all possible service to their\nmartial brethren at the conquest (Num. XXXII). Enough that after many\nlong-protracted struggles with the people of the land the advancing\nHebrews got a large part of Canaan into their power. The details and the\nchronology of these wars lie outside my present scheme. The history of\nthe civilisation of the Hebrews in Canaan has here to be considered only\non one side\u2014with reference to the history of Religion. In the previous\nchapter we left the nomadic people wandering in the desert, and\nworshipping those beneficent powers which provide the nomad with his\nconditions of life and protect him from the scorching heat so hostile to\nwanderers\u2014the Rain, his mother the Cloud, and the luminous smile of the\ncloud, the Lightning. The commencement of religion does not kill off the\nwhole myth at one blow. For the mental activity required for the\ncreation and propagation of myths does not cease when polyonomy\nvanishes, but only has its full vivaciousness abridged by that process\nof language. But the process goes on very gradually; on domains not yet\nfully attacked by it, accordingly, the telling of myths continues for\nlong. One part may remain when another has been converted into religion.\nNow the law described in Chapter IV. would require, that, after\nsettlement in towns and adoption of agricultural life, the part of the\nHebrew myth which was not yet turned into religion should be subject to\na development corresponding to the transition from nomadic to\nagricultural life, by which the solar figures, the victors over Darkness\nand Storm, take up the position of honour and sympathy always accorded\nto them by the agriculturist.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. Here, however, we have to notice a peculiarity of Hebrew\ndevelopment resulting from the occupation of Canaan.\n\nPolitically, the Hebrew nation on settling in Canaan had power to\nannihilate a few small tribes which before the occupation had held the\nmiddle of the land. But they brought with them a minimum of civilisation\nand mental endowments, and intellectually had nothing to oppose to the\nlong-established civilisation of the old inhabitants,[607] and\nespecially of the neighbouring Phenicians, who even then were the\nancient occupiers of a great historical position. In mercantile and\nindustrial respects, especially, they were very dependent on that\nnation, which was the chief bearer of the commerce and industry of\nantiquity.[608] How should the Hebrews have risen above such dependence?\nfor the Phenicians exerted a powerful intellectual influence not only\nupon the mentally inferior tribes of Canaan, but also upon the western\nnations with which they held intercourse; as in recent times Ewald has\nagain strongly asserted.[609] Notwithstanding the contradiction of some\nscholars who depreciate Phenician civilisation,[610] this seems to be\ntolerably well established.\n\nThere is a phenomenon which has been repeated countless times in the\nhistory of the world. A conquered people intellectually superior to its\nconquerors may, any political dependence notwithstanding, enforce its\nintellectual preeminence by assimilating to itself the nation which has\nsucceeded to its dominion. The political victor has no power to\nincorporate the mind of the subjugated, if the latter possesses a higher\ncivilisation than his own. For example, the Hyks\u00f4s, who were strong\nenough to annihilate the rule of the Egyptians in the Delta, could found\nno independent civilisation in the conquered land, but made the Egyptian\nculture entirely their own. And when the Aztecs, or more strictly the\nsecond horde of the Chichimecs (Northmen), coming from Aztlan and\nCalifornia, overwhelmed Anahuac in the twelfth century, and subjugated\nthe Toltecs, a people which had already attained a certain degree of\ncivilisation, it was again the conquered that imparted their culture to\nthe conquerors. All the elements of civilisation\u2014arts, manners, rights,\nusages, writing, etc.\u2014which the Spanish conquerors found existing among\nthe Aztecs, had been received by them from the conquered Toltecs, to\nwhose intellectual influence they were forced to accommodate themselves,\nnot having anything more potent of their own to impart.[611] The same is\nseen in China, first in the tenth and again in the seventeenth century.\nThe victorious Khitem dynasty, as later the Manchu dynasty, which still\nholds the sceptre of the Middle Kingdom, could only accept and advance\nthe native civilisation and the peculiarities of the old Chinese nation.\nAnd who can help thinking of the often-quoted instance of the Franks as\nconquerors of Gaul? And the relation of the Normans to the population of\nFrance conquered by them is most curious. The conquerors lost their\nmother-tongue in favour of the French, took to themselves French\ninstitutions, laws and customs, and actually transplanted subsequently\nthe French language to England.[612] The same phenomenon is also\nencountered on the domain of Religion.[613] For the Phenicians, to whom\nwe recur, it was the easier to establish their system, as they came as\nconquerors to places where they found a population intellectually\ninferior to themselves. When by the foundation of Carthage they gained\nan establishment in Northern Africa, they exerted an influence on the\nLibyans which almost suppressed everything native. \u2018Phenician\ncivilisation prevailed in Libya just as Greek in Asia Minor and Syria\nafter Alexander\u2019s campaigns, if not with equal force. At the courts of\nthe nomad Sheikhs Phenician was spoken and written, and the civilised\nnative tribes took the Phenician alphabet for their languages; but it\nwas neither the spirit of the Phenicians nor the policy of Carthage to\nPhenicise them entirely.\u2019[614] But this very Phenician language, which\nas bearer of a higher civilisation suppressed the language of\nsurrounding tribes and the civilisation connected with them, had in its\nturn to step into the background. A civilisation of superior force and\nintensity, the Arabian, assailed it, and put the Arabic language of the\nconquerors of North Africa in the place of that of the Carthaginian\ncolonies. Renan is wrong in asserting, \u2018L\u2019arabe n\u2019absorba que les\ndialectes qui lui \u00e9taient cong\u00e9n\u00e8res, tels que le syriaque, le chald\u00e9en,\nle samaritain. Partout ailleurs, il ne put effacer les idiomes\n\u00e9tablis.\u2019[615] We will not here enter on an enquiry, to what extent\nArabic in the middle ages and in modern times has supplanted other\nidioms. But two considerations must be suggested in answer to Renan\u2019s\nthesis.\n\nThe first is, that it is difficult to see what power a relationship of\nlanguage like that between Arabic and Phenician can possess to cause the\nweaker civilisation connected with one of the languages in question to\nbe supplanted by the stronger civilisation belonging to the other; when\nthe relationship is so remote as to be clearly understood only by\nlinguists, and neither known to ordinary people speaking either tongue,\nnor even instinctively felt by the popular mind (if any such instinct\ncan be allowed in psychology). Indeed Semitic philologists themselves,\neven with the knowledge of one or more of the Semitic dialects besides\ntheir mother-tongue, arrived comparatively late at acknowledgment of\nthis relationship.[616] It is easy to understand how within the bounds\nof the Arabic tongue the Northern dialect supplanted the Southern, when\nthe Northern tribes, especially that of Kureysh, gained the political\nand social hegemony over Arabia, and their dialect was written down and\nintroduced into literature. Here, to say nothing of political and\nreligious causes, the extraordinary similarity of the two shades of the\nArabic language, of which the commonest Arab could not but be conscious,\nmade the suppression of the one in favour of the other easy; we have\nfrequent opportunities of observing the same in the dialects of European\nlanguages. But it is not so easy to conceive that a relationship in\nlanguage which is only to be discovered by learned research can promote\nthe process of suppression of dialects. To the Arab, Syriac is as\nforeign as French or any perfectly strange tongue. Botrus al-Bust\u00e2ni, an\neminent savant at Beyr\u00fbt, the compiler of a dictionary of his native\nlanguage and active editor of several Arabic journals, had no fewer\ndifficulties to overcome when he devoted himself to the study of the\nSyriac language in the Maronite convents of Lebanon, than when he\nlearned English by intercourse with Dr. Van Dijk at the American\nProtestant Mission; perhaps even greater, as in the latter case\nmouth-to-mouth intercourse removed many difficulties. A Maronite priest\nat Damascus assured me that the acquisition of the Italian language gave\nhim but few hard nuts to crack, whilst in the language of his Syriac\nChurch he could not get further than the elements which were\nindispensable to his office. The Fin found no special difficulty in\nbecoming Swedish, because Swedish is a Teutonic and Finnish a Ugrian\nlanguage. In Hungary, during a long subjection to the Turks, Turkish had\nno appreciable effect on the language, except in lending a few words,\nalthough Hungarian and Turkish belong to one and the same group of\nlanguages. Hence when one language ousts another, it is not their\nrelationship, but solely the superiority of the one people in intellect\nand matters of culture that determines the result.\n\nThe second answer to Renan is that it is historically untrue that Arabic\ncould conquer only cognate idioms, but elsewhere had no power to oust\nthe native tongues. Where is the Coptic now? a once powerful language\nhaving no connexion with Arabic, the vernacular use of which in Egypt\nwas totally annihilated by the Arabic. The dialects of the Negro\ncountries are beginning to give place more and more to the Arabic, and\ntheir ultimate defeat in the contest with that language will be hastened\nby the advances of the power of the Viceroy over the equatorial regions.\n\nThis is the great struggle for existence on the domain of Mind\u2014a\nstruggle which the Hebrews, with the small amount of culture that they\nbrought to Canaan, could not sustain, nor even attempt, against the\nsettled population and the neighbouring powerful Canaanites of the\ncoast. On this a basis could be found for a hypothesis which has never\nhad any other foundation of the least firmness. It is now revived by\nProfessor J.G. M\u00fcller of Basle.[617] The Hebrews, we are told,\noriginally spoke a different language not connected with that of Canaan;\nbut, not being able to bring it into general use in their new country,\ngave it up, and took over from the Canaanites the language that we call\nHebrew, which really possesses a far more palpable similarity to all\nknown relics of the old idioms of Canaan than is the case with languages\nwhich though connected, are intrinsically distinct. And assuredly the\nconsideration of the lately found Moabitish monument, the column of\nvictory of King Mesha, which shows us a form of language perfectly\nintelligible by the aid of the Hebrew grammar and the Hebrew lexicon,\nand an historical style indistinguishable from that of the Hebrews,\ninvoluntarily suggests the thought that we ought to speak rather of\nidentity than of connexion of languages. Even the Phenician language,\nthough not, as many erroneously suppose, absolutely identical with\nHebrew, nor even so near to it as the more Southern language of Moab,\nexhibits a far closer relationship with the latter than is generally\nfound between different languages of the same family.[618] Phenician was\ncertainly not an idiom unintelligible to the Hebrews; and indeed a\nHebrew prophet even calls his mother-tongue the \u2018language of Canaan\u2019\n(sephath Kena\u02bfan, Is. XIX. 18). The idea that the Hebrews changed their\nlanguage in Canaan possesses, indeed, no high degree of probability,\nespecially in so extreme and violent a form as is given to it by J.G.\nM\u00fcller\u2014least of all for us, inasmuch as the nomadic myth of the Hebrews,\nwhich was created quite independently of Canaan, never contains any but\nHebrew names. But in matters of culture and manners, in which the\nHebrews, only just working their way up out of the nomadic stage, still\nheld a very primitive position at their entrance into Canaan, they were\nmost certainly influenced by the conquered original inhabitants and by\ntheir powerful neighbours. These influences were immediately perceptible\nin the form given to Religion and to social and political institutions.\nThe Hebrews did not possess sufficient resistant force of mind to work\nthe solar elements of _their own_ myth into a religion suitable to an\nagricultural people, and had no strength to repel the Canaanitish Solar\nreligion, which must have been already long growing into completeness\nfrom an old Canaanitish Solar myth; they could not accept the challenge,\nbut yielded. With general notions of religion they also adopted its\nforms and institutes\u2014the Temples, which bear the same relation to the\nSukk\u00f4th used for Divine worship as the fixed house of the townsman to\nthe hut of the nomad; the High places;[619] the sacred Trees and Woods;\nthe Human Sacrifices; the Priesthood, whose relation to the Sons of Levi\namong the nomads again resembles that of a powerful dynasty to the\nfamily of a Bedaw\u00ee Sheikh; the Ritual of Sacrifice, and much besides.\nWith the religion and religious institutions of the Canaanites, their\nreligious terminology was also naturalised among the Hebrews. The\nPhenician title of the Priest, K\u00f4h\u00ean\u2014\u039a\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c2 (Hellenised from \u039a\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03bd)\n\u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u039a\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f41 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1\u00b7 \u1f41\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03bf\u03ae\u03c2 (Hesychius)\u2014became among\nthe Hebrews also the official name of the public sacrificers; and the\nfact that a derivative verb was formed from it proves it to have become\ncompletely naturalised in ordinary speech.[620] The extant monuments of\nthe sacrificial ritual of the Phenicians, viz., the so-called\nSacrificial Tablet of Marseilles, discovered in 1845, and the\nCarthaginian Sacrificial documents published more recently by\nDavis,[621] place before our eyes much the same as we have in part of\nthe Book of Leviticus; and it is to be assumed that, although, after the\nprofound investigations of Graf[622] and Zunz,[623] the Post-Captivity\norigin of that book is impressed with increasing urgency on our\nconviction, still the Sacrificial laws contained in it are only a\ncodification of older regulations which arose and were in force in\nsacerdotal circles at the time of the Hebrew dominion in Canaan, but\nwere not, and ought not to be, known to the people, as they referred\nonly to priestly functions. It would be inconceivable that a regular\nsacrificial worship could exist without such arrangements and fixed\nritual. Among the Carthaginians the contents of these sacrificial\ntables, with the ordinances and apportionments to be found on them, had\n_canonical_ validity, and were not occasional or arbitrary orders. That\nthis is so, is to be inferred from the fact that the sacrificial tariff\ndiscovered by Davis in the ruins of Carthage exhibits only an abridged\nedition of the Marseilles Tablet, which also was derived from\nCarthage.[624]\n\nNot only religious, but also social and political institutions were\nintroduced from the Phenicians into the public life of the Hebrews. How\nelse could a nation passing suddenly without political experience from\nnomadic to civil life produce those institutions without which a nation\ncan neither constitute itself as a state nor continue to exist? Thus we\nfind among the Hebrews from the beginning the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem (Judges), who\nare known as Suffetes of the Carthaginians from Livy and the\nInscriptions. It must be assumed that, although this institution is not\ndistinctly proved to have existed in the mother-country, its root is to\nbe sought there; which harmonises well with the highly developed civic\nconstitution of the Phenicians. To draw an inference from the\ninstitutions of the colonies to those of the mother-country must here,\nas in other cases also, be treated as perfectly justifiable. Let it be\nremembered that we should have no knowledge even of the elaborate system\nof priests and sacrifices among the Phenicians, but for two remarkable\nmonuments of antiquity: the Tablets of Marseilles and of Carthage. On\none of the most important elements of Phenician religious life,\ntherefore, information is only to be found in the colonies; and the same\nmust certainly be true of social and political questions. In the present\ncase it is sure to be allowable, as the official name Sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d is found\nin a Greek translation used of Tyre and Sidon. It must not indeed be\nsupposed that the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem of the Hebrews can be placed exactly beside\nthe Phenician Suffetes. Whilst the latter is a permanent dignity and a\nfixed institution, the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem of the Hebrews are not so much\nofficials as a sort of _duces ex virtute_, \u2018who might come and go\nwithout any alteration in the legal bases of the state,\u2019 as Ewald\nsays.[625] But if we have to allow that the Hebrew Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem are not\nholders of so fixed an office as their namesakes in Phenicia, but were\nonly guerilla-chiefs in times of pressure of war, yet Phenician\ninfluence cannot be denied, when we see that, just when the nomadic\ntribal divisions were beginning to grow very loose and to make way for\ntown-life, these chiefs were called by a name identical with the\nofficial name of certain Phenician dignitaries of rather different\ncharacter. It is evident from this that the Hebrews regarded their\nprovisional chiefs as equivalents of these Phenician officers of state;\nthey apperceived them, so to speak, by an idea derived from Phenicia.\nBut, on the other hand, this view of the influence of the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem\nrests on the picture of their actions given in the \u2018Book of Judges.\u2019 Now\nit must not be forgotten that many of these Judges\u2019 names are mythical\n(as Samson, Jephthah, Gideon), used to fill up a period which to\nposterity was a mere blank with no historical contents, except the bare\nfact of a continuous contest with the Philistines. This historical\nframe, as we shall soon see, is filled with myths, which, when\nreinterpreted in a national sense, yield a supply of national heroes,\nwho then can be introduced as Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem. But the harmonising of national\nstories was not pushed to a sufficient degree of continuity to form a\nfoundation for a fixed historical picture. It is therefore better, in\nforming our judgment on the dignity of the so-called Judges, to allow\nourselves to be determined more by the name Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem itself than by the\nnature of the nationalised myths attached to it. Gr\u00e4tz[626] has quite\nrecently renewed the attempt to render doubtful the existence of the\nSh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem-institution among the Hebrews, and especially combated any\nconnexion of the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem with the Punic Suffetes; and in this the\njudgment of the most competent professional authorities is on his side.\nBut, not to speak of his view of the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem as representatives of an\ninstitution, he sets up a linguistic conjecture which arouses many a\ndoubt. For it requires strong etymological imagination to deny to the\nHebrew word sh\u00e2pha\u1e6d the signification _judicare_. Sober Biblical\nstudents and philologists will not be imposed on by the passages quoted\nby Gr\u00e4tz in justification and support of his conjecture. Not to mention\nother passages, compare only the words of Is. I. 17, 23 with the\npassages of Scripture which, Gr\u00e4tz says, speak of rushing up to the aid\nof \u2018oppressed or injured persons, widows and orphans.\u2019 The word r\u00eebh is\nnot calculated to support this conjecture. But, that the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem,\nthough not hereditary nor even paid officers of state (as no one would\npretend they were), were yet certainly heads of the state, appointed by\nthe voice of the people, is proved by the mere fact that the Sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d was\nregarded in the same light as the Melekh, as a species of the same\ngenus. So e.g. in Judges IX. 6, 16, where the instalment of a Sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d is\ndenoted by haml\u00eekh, and Judges XVII. 6, XVIII. 1, XXI. 25, where the\ninterregnum between one Sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d and the next is described as a time \u2018in\nwhich no melekh (king) reigned over Israel, and every one could do what\nwas right in his own eyes.\u2019 And the consideration of the word Sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d\nitself leads to the conviction that the office was an institution\nsuggested by Phenician custom. For it is found in no other Semitic\nlanguage in the same signification as in these two dialects of\nCanaan.[627] The Samaritan, in which Sh\u00e2ph\u00e2\u1e6d is also found,[628]\nscarcely requires separate mention. So the Hebrews, as was so often the\ncase, must have borrowed the term sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d, together with the\ncorresponding institution, from their cultivated neighbours; for it\ncannot be assumed that the expression for an idea implying so advanced a\nstage of civilisation as Judge had its origin in the primeval age of\nethnological community between Hebrews and Canaanites. And later, when\nthe Hebrews began to appreciate the institution of Kingship, as existing\nin many neighbouring nations,[629] and wished to be ruled by kings, the\ntheocratic historian himself describes this innovation as borrowed,\nmaking the people say to the prophet Samuel, \u2018Give us a King to judge\nus, as all the nations [have a king], that we also may be like all the\nnations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight\nour battles\u2019 (1 Sam. VIII. 5, 20). Even concerning the political\nsubjection of the tribes of Canaan, it has long been perceived that this\nwas by no means so complete as is commonly supposed, but that the\nCanaanitish element in the centre of the Hebrew dominion was powerful\nenough[630] to nourish exterior religious or civilising influences. A\nsomewhat later didactic poet exclaims, \u2018They did not destroy the nations\nwhich Jahveh told them [to destroy]; but mixed with the nations and\nlearned their works\u2019 (Ps. CVI. 34 _seq._). To this time belongs the\nnaturalisation of theological terms and consequently of theological\nconceptions, for the independent working out of which the Hebrews had\nnot passed through the necessary historical experience and continuous\nreligious stages, but in which the history of the religion of the\nCanaanites found its natural result. At the time when the nomadic nation\nof the Hebrews entered Canaan, it first, so to speak, produced out of\nthe ancient myth the first elements of a religion; we cannot speak of a\n_system_ of religion existing in that age. In the Canaanitish peoples,\non the other hand, a systematical religion had already been formed. Even\nindependently of the preponderating spiritual influence of the native\npopulation, it was particularly natural to the Hebrews to attach\nthemselves to their system, as community of language familiarised them\nwith much of the religious terminology of the Canaanites. Ever since the\nHebrews had by their own efforts begun to have any religious ideas, they\ncalled every power which they regarded as divine \u00cal and Shadday \u2018the\nPowerful;\u2019 and as these Powers (which they also called El\u00f4h\u00eem, i.e. \u2018the\nWorshipped\u2019 or \u2018the Feared\u2019) were seen by them on the dark sky, \u00cal was\nalso called \u02bfEly\u00f4n \u2018the Highest\u2019 (a synonym of Abh-r\u00e2m). To the Hebrews\nthese names were not yet exclusively theological, _termini technici_ of\nreligion. Religion itself had not yet grown so stiff and fixed as to\nhave taken from such names their appellative character: and that of\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem and \u02bfEly\u00f4n continued to the latest times. But with the Canaanites\neven at that early age these ancient Semitic expressions had been\nalready employed long enough in a theological sense to take the step\nwhich converted them into a religious terminology. Many synonyms of the\nterms in question are found among the Phenicians as religious terms, and\namong the Hebrews (when the words are equally native there) in a\ncompletely appellative sense, e.g. Ba\u02bfal \u2018Lord,\u2019 Kabb\u00eer \u2018Great,\nPowerful.\u2019\n\nThis community of language greatly promoted the introduction of\nCanaanitish religion among the Hebrews. Although the above-mentioned\nnames impressed the Hebrews differently, being not yet limited to a\nspecially religious signification, yet the knowledge of their meaning as\nwords, which was native to the Hebrews, promoted the acquisition of the\nritual attached to them by the Canaanites. Thus it came to pass that\nbesides \u00cal, El\u00f4h\u00eem, \u02bfEly\u00f4n, Shadday, even Ba\u02bfal received worship from\nthe Hebrews in Canaan, of which the Biblical documents often speak (and\nhe is not likely to have been the only divine person borrowed from the\nPhenicians), and that those names which had previously begun to assume a\nreligious sense were, by intellectual as well as practical intercourse\nwith the Canaanites, filled with the force they had to the Canaanites.\nIt is therefore the exact opposite of the real state of things to call\nthe El\u00f4h\u00eem-idea specially Hebrew, and make Jahveism Canaanitish, as some\nDutch theologians do. It is equally impossible to suppose the names\nthemselves to have been unknown till then to the Hebrews, as J.G. M\u00fcller\ninfers in connexion with his ethnological hypothesis.[631] The names, as\ncomponent parts of the language, are the property of Canaanites and\nHebrews alike; only their theological employment and the worship founded\nupon them are to be regarded as Canaanitish. But it is especially this\nemployment of the names which has to be considered in relation to the\nHistory of Civilisation.\n\nThus we see how the Hebrews in Canaan learned much as to religion as\nwell as to politics from the conquered neighbouring aborigines. The\nreligious ideas produced on the nomadic stage from the nomadic mythology\nwere wiped away, and only a few relics of the old nomadic religion\nremained to a late age, either actual residues or mere memories.\nSpiritually poor, the nation was handed over to the powerful influence\nof the already formed culture of Canaan, and thus condemned to mere\nreceptivity. Accordingly, they never had an opportunity of further\ndeveloping their myths on the agricultural stage and converting them\ninto elements of a religion. Hence comes the remarkable fact that from\nthis point the myths of the Hebrews cease to grow, in the way in which\nthose of the Aryan nations grew. Only a small cycle of myths of the Sun\nand of Civilisation were formed at this time; and the regular advance of\nthe Mythical to the Religious was arrested by that religious influence\nwhich pressed in with full force from outside. The most complete and\nrounded-off solar myth extant in Hebrew is that of Shimsh\u00f4n (Samson), a\ncycle of mythical conceptions fully comparable with the Greek myth of\nHerakles. But Samson never got so far as to be admitted, like Herakles,\ninto the society of the gods. Those who say that mythologies have\nconverted Samson to a _deus solaris_ make a malicious perversion of the\ntruth, merely because they set themselves against any mythological\ninvestigation on Semitic ground.[632] Whilst the Hebrews were thus\ntaking in from the Canaanites things quite new to them, by which the\nregular further growth of their own was arrested, a considerable portion\nof their own store of legends must naturally have been starved out. For\nwhatever ceases to grow, falls into slow decay, and at last disappears\nand leaves no sign behind. Here is discovered the origin of the\ndefectiveness and fragmentary nature which strikes us in reconstructing\nthe old Hebrew myths, when compared with the richness and variety of the\nAryan myths among those nations which have passed through all stages of\ncivilisation regularly and without obstruction or perverting influence\nfrom foreign forces.\n\nThe Myth is converted either into Religion or into History; the figures\nof the myth become either Gods and god-born Heroes, or Ancestors of the\nnation to which the myth belonged. What part of the myth cannot be\nconverted, or has not been converted, into religion, and what has ceased\nto be religious without ceasing to exist in the popular mind, is\nconverted into history; for all that remains in the human consciousness\nas a living portion of it must have a distinct impress; no meaningless\nvegetating is possible. Nothing is without an impressed form; when an\nold impress has lost its meaning, a new one is made. It is these new\nimpressions that keep the elements of the ancient myth alive in the mind\nof the people far beyond the mythical age. Among the Hebrews this new\nforce worked more powerfully than elsewhere in changing the form and\nimpress of the still living elements of the myth, converting almost all\nmyth into history.[633] This result was attained with the cooperation of\nan important factor in the History of Civilisation, which also\ndetermined the _direction_ which the myth should take in being\ntransformed into history. We must now consider this factor.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. Though the Hebrews were intellectually dependent on the older\ninhabitants of Canaan, and had to take up a receptive position towards\nthem in matters of civilisation and religion, it was nevertheless\ninevitable that a strong antagonism should grow up between the two\nsides. The Hebrews edged themselves in like an unbidden guest into the\nmidst of the Canaanitish system of tribes. As they could gain their\npolitical position in that system only by conquest and repression, so\nalso they could maintain, protect, and confirm it only by continuous\ndefensive wars. We find Philistines, Moabites, and Edomites the constant\ndeadly foes of the existence of the Hebrew state, and the history of\nIsrael in Canaan is filled up with incessant struggles of greater or\nless magnitude, in which the Hebrews, themselves scarcely settled in a\nhome, were forced to engage against the repressed old inhabitants on the\none hand, and the menaced neighbouring peoples on the other. Moreover,\nthe nomadic characteristic, still preserved by the Hebrews, of\nfaithfully maintaining the memory of their national individuality, could\nnot be entirely obscured by their new spiritual life, which was only\nborrowed from strangers, especially as the constant wars in which they\nwere necessarily involved against those strangers were calculated to\nheighten and confirm it. Indeed, the spirit of tribe and race, the\nrepelling and exclusive tendency which characterised the Canaanitish\npeoples,[634] nourished in the Hebrews the desire to insist on the\nenforcement and development of individuality on their side too. This\nexclusiveness, this consciousness of individual peculiarity which lived\nin the mind of the people, could not now find expression in religion.\nWhen even modern Biblical criticism, coming into the inheritance of a\nconception which obtained acceptance from religious animosity, still\ncontinues to insist on the \u2018National God of the Hebrews,\u2019 it commits a\ndecided error, at least in reference to the age of which we are now\nspeaking, and especially with regard to the El\u00f4h\u00eem. The consciousness of\nnational peculiarity could not, at this stage of religion among the\nHebrews, find any expression on the domain of religion. Yet it must\nperforce gain expression somewhere, and could not do so anywhere except\non a domain on which the most original impress of their own mind was\nstill visible\u2014in the myths, insofar as they were not yet swept away by\nforeign influence.\n\nThe awaking of National Consciousness plays a very prominent part in the\nhistory of the development of the Myth. From the moment when in ancient\ntimes this idea began to fill the soul of a great national community, it\nseized on and transformed the whole material of which its mythology was\nmade. The fact that this noble consciousness gives a distinct direction\nof its own to everything that fills the human soul, is another proof of\nits power to transform the spiritual life. In modern times the kindling\nof national self-consciousness, advanced by the arousing of spiritual\nopposition to foreign influences which had previously repressed national\nindividuality, causes the production of documents to prove the awakening\nof this national opposition, documents which belong to the best part of\nliterature and intellectual labour. Similarly, in ancient times before\nliterature, this consciousness of opposition impressed its image\nespecially on the myth, and made that subservient to its purpose. And on\nconsidering the relation of the myth to the idea of nationality, we see\non many sides, how closely and inseparably the two are connected\ntogether, how the idea operates to transform the myth, and how it needs\nthe myth as a support; for the myth, going back to the earliest times,\nconfers on the new idea something like an historical title, and gives a\nbroad basis to the intenseness of its force by furnishing a\njustification of it. Hence it comes to pass that nations which have\npreserved no great stock of original myths on which the awakened\nnational consciousness could fall back, instinctively create similar\nstories, and this even in relatively modern times, in which a system of\nreligion hardened into crystal on every side, combined with the\ncorresponding stage of intellectual development, would leave no room for\nthe revival of mythical activity. Of this there are two noteworthy\ninstances, one in the middle ages (the twelfth or thirteenth century),\nthe other in this century. The Cymry of Wales, becoming alive to the\nopposition in nationality between themselves and the English, felt the\nneed of finding a justification of this opposition in the oldest\nprehistoric times. It was then first suggested to them that they were\ndescendants of the ancient renowned Celtic nation; and to keep alive\nthis Celtic national pride they introduced an institution of New Druids,\na sort of secret society like the Freemasons. The New Druids, like the\nold ones, taught a sort of national religion, which however, the people\nhaving long become Christian and preserved no independent national\ntraditions, they had mostly to invent themselves. Thus arose the\nso-called Celtic mythology of the god Hu and the goddess Ceridolu, etc.,\nmere poetical fictions, which never lived in popular belief.[635] The\nother instance is furnished by the Hungarian national literature of the\ntime when, to revive the \u2018ancient glory,\u2019 Andrew Horv\u00e1th and Michael\nV\u00f6r\u00f6smarty created new myths, mythic figures and a national epic, in\nplace of the mere fragments remaining of the old Hungarian cycle of\nmyths, with the view of reviving national feeling and consciousness in\ntheir fellow countrymen. And a few of these new creations have in a\ncourse of a few decads of years penetrated so deep into the national\nmind as to be treated as something primitive and aboriginal; so e.g.\nHad\u00far, the god of war, etc.[636]\n\nFar more organic and natural is the effect produced by the national\nsentiment and national opposition on the form of the myth wherever\ncopious mythic materials exist, which it can influence and transform.\nThe entire contents of the myths\u2014the mythological figures and all that\nis told of them\u2014are apperceived by the national movement and receive\nfrom it a new interpretation. This may be seen clearly in the case of\nthe old Persian myth, mentioned briefly above (pp. 15, 16), where I\nshowed that all that it told of the contests and mutual relations of the\nSun and Night was, at the stage of the rising national consciousness,\nconverted into contests between \u00cer\u00e2n and T\u00fbr\u00e2n\u2014the heroes of mythology\nbecame national heroes, the victorious Sun became a victorious helper\nand saviour of the nation, and the malicious intriguing Darkness the\ncunning hero of the hostile people. This national interpretation of the\nmyth is only another side of the process which resulted in\nindividualising the mythical figures and created personalities of\ntheological significance. I have already insisted on the fact that\nanother set of the mythical figures when converted into individuals\nassume an historical character. This comes to pass in various ways:\neither the myth which is turned into history first passes through the\nstage of religion, and then becomes history; or secondly, the historical\ntransformation is effected in immediate sequence upon the old\nmythological stage; or lastly, the mythological figures assume a meaning\nwhich is at the same time both religious and historical, like the Greek\nHeroes. On the development of the Hebrew myth also the awakening of the\nnational spirit exercised a great influence. The consciousness of\nnational individuality gave a new direction to all the ideas of the\nHebrews, and so also to their mythology. Among the Greeks and Indians\nthe chief figures of mythology\u2014not to speak of occasional\nlocalisation\u2014preserved a cosmopolitan character; for Zeus, Indra, and\nothers have no special national character. But the figures of the Hebrew\nmyths at this period became the national progenitors of the Hebrew\npeople, and the mythology itself the national primeval history of the\nHebrews before their settlement in the land of Canaan. Abhr\u00e2m, the \u2018High\nFather,\u2019 is converted into Abhr\u00e2h\u00e2m, the abh ham\u00f4n g\u00f4y\u00eem, \u2018Father of a\nmass of Nations,\u2019 and at the same time into h\u00e2-\u02bfIbhr\u00ee, \u2018the Hebrew\u2019\n(Gen. XVII. 4, 5, XIV. 13); and all other figures of the myth are made\nto subserve the national idea. On the one hand, they are eager to have\ndocumentary proof of their nation\u2019s noble origin and glorious past; on\nthe other, they nourish a feeling of opposition towards other\nnationalities, on which they cast shame. The nation of Edom receives\nEsau as ancestor: and the reminiscence of nomadic conceptions which\ndraws their sympathy towards Jacob, the persecuted brother, and turns\nwith antipathy away from the red solar hunter, is again revived in the\nservice of the formation of a national myth which paints Esau in the\nmost repulsive colours. The old mythological incest of Lot\u2019s daughters\nis made the cause of the origin of two Canaanitish tribes, the Ammonites\nand the Moabites.[637] The Philistines also are dragged through this\nstory-making process of national antagonism. The primeval heavenly\n\u2018Father-King\u2019 Abimelek, who conceives a warm love for the wife of the\nMorning-sky and thinks to carry her off, is made a king of the\nPhilistines, and Shechem, the Early Morning, the seducer of Dinah, is\nconverted into a prince of the Hivvites. In the story of Dinah, as given\nin Genesis, we have an especially eloquent testimony to the national\nanimosity to which this conversion of the myth owes its origin. This\naspect of the story has been very fully proved by a Dutch scholar, Dr.\nOort. It exhibits in the people newly awakened to national\nself-consciousness a tendency to abominate all connexion with the\nCanaanites, and introduces as representatives or types of this tendency\nthe brothers Simeon and Levi, the zealots for the purity of the Hebrew\nfamily.[638] Thus we see that the national treatment of the myth is not\nmerely of the nature of narrative, but at the same time also instructive\nor didactic. Ham, the unworthy son who reveals the nakedness of the\nsolar hero, is regarded as the denier of his father and made the\nancestor of all the Canaanites, and visited by his father\u2019s curse. \u2018And\nNoah awoke from his wine and learned what his youngest son had done to\nhim. And he said, Cursed be Canaan, let him be a slave of slaves to his\nbrethren. And he said, Blessed be Jahveh, the God of Shem, and let\nCanaan be a slave to them\u2019 (Gen. IX. 24\u201326). We see that the national\npassion turns especially on Canaan: for the story makes the offended\nfather curse, not the offender Ham, but Canaan, who is in the\nethnographical genealogy only his grandson. It is impossible to be blind\nto the factors which are concealed behind such a conception. In the case\nof Esau too, the national story makes him choose his wives from the\ndaughters of Canaan, to whom Isaac, the patriarch of the Hebrews, and\nRebekah the mother of the tribe, strongly object (Gen. XXVII. 46,\nXXVIII. 1, 6, 8); so much so that the mother would rather die than that\nher favourite son Jacob should also take one of them to wife, and the\nfather repeatedly urges on him to have nothing to do with that people.\nOn this very occasion it is mentioned with emphasis that Esau is\nidentical with Edom, or according to another version is the father of\nEdom (Gen. XXXVI. 1, 43).\n\nThe national pride of a people roused to a consciousness of its worth\nmust be strengthened by the memories of national heroes, and find\nnourishment and life in such memories; and this impulse works with a\nrevived force even in later times, in which historical reminiscences of\nthe olden time are beginning to fade. The Hebrew people found heroes\neven in some mythical figures; they were turned into Hebrew national\nheroes, and their celestial contest became a national war against the\nPhilistines, and was removed to the age of the Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem or Judges,\nwhich was in memory connected with the hardest struggles and fiercest\nwars against the Philistines. The blinded Shimsh\u00f4n, Samson, the setting\nsun robbed of his locks and his eyesight, is brought forward as a victim\nof the perfidious cunning of the Canaanites. The Goat Y\u00e2\u02bf\u00eal (Jael), and\nthe Lightning B\u00e2r\u00e2\u1e33, the Smasher Gide\u02bf\u00f4n, mere mythical expressions\n(clearly exhibited as such by Steinthal), are sent to battle against the\nPhilistines; and the attractive part of the handsome ruddy sharp-eyed\nyouth who slays the monster of darkness by throwing stones, is assigned\nas a piece of biography to the historical hero-king David, who slays the\nPhilistine giant Goliath in single combat, and delivers the Hebrew\npeople from their dangerous enemy.[639] From the last example we see\nthat, besides mythical figures becoming historic personages in the\nservice of the national idea, historical figures also may receive\nbiographical features proper to mythic heroes. Not only are the figures\nof the myth converted into historical ones by assigning to them a part\nin historical events, but events of mythology are shifted into\nhistorical times by fastening them on to historical persons.\n\nThe entire materials of legend are clothed in a national garb. The\nHebrews in Canaan retained the nomadic tribe-divisions. Every tribe was\nprovided with an ancestor, and every one of these ancestors was made a\nson of Jacob, who was at the same time identified with Israel. The\ntwelve stars of the nightly sky descended upon the new people of Canaan,\nand took on themselves the duties of Eponymi. The history of each of\nthese fathers of tribes became the tribe\u2019s historical reminiscence. The\nnational passion, the revived consciousness of individuality, blew the\nglimmering sparks of story-building into a clear flame, and determined\nthe direction or tendency of the stories. The history of this epoch\nsuggests a motive for the prevailingly _national_ development of the\nHebrew materials of legend. Hence it comes to pass that the\nindividualised figures of the Hebrew myth appear as national ancestors\nand fathers of tribes, some as fathers of the Hebrew people with a\nnegative spirit of exclusiveness towards everything foreign, some as\nfathers of the hostile tribes, combating the ancestors of the Hebrews.\nThus the ancestors reflect in a dim primitive age their own fortunes and\nrelation to the tribes of Canaan. The same psychological process which\nin later time caused the Agadic interpreters to declare the principle:\nma\u02bfas\u00ea \u00e2bh\u00f4th s\u00eem\u00e2n lebh\u00e2n\u00eem \u2018the deeds of the Patriarchs are types for\ntheir descendants,\u2019[640] was, inverted, the creative cause of the\nlegends of the fathers and their doings.\n\nIn such wise did the Hebrew people find expression for the consciousness\nof their individuality, which they might easily have utterly lost in\ntheir spiritual dependence upon their neighbours; namely, in a new\ninterpretation of their ancient myths. When they were becoming quite\nCanaanitish through what they borrowed from others in religion and\nculture, their whole soul was again electrified, and a new spirit\naroused by the feeling of self-dependence confirmed by severe contests.\nWhat it could not put into the religion, which it was powerless to\ncreate of itself, it put into a glorious series of poetical legends.\nThese expressed both the national consciousness on the one hand, and the\nnational passionateness on the other; and it may be assumed that with\nthe progress of animosities the tone of the legends increased in\nbitterness. I adduced above the development of the Persian national\nlegend as an instance showing how a national legend grows out of a myth.\nAt the close of this chapter I will again revert to the same region of\nlegend, to show how national animosity can operate in transforming old\nmaterials down to the latest times, in which new legends can scarcely be\nstill created. Fird\u00f4s\u00ee gives the national legends of the contests with\nT\u00fbr\u00e2n, formed from the myths. But the lately roused antagonism of the\nPersians to the Arabs, who had become the dominant power and were\nextinguishing Iranism, also finds expression in the form which he\nimparts to the legends. On reading his description of the behaviour of\nthe Arabian ambassadors at the court of Fer\u00eed\u00fbn, we observe that the\nlegend here takes a tone of hostility to the Arabs, and criticises the\ndark side of the Arabian national character; and the sufferings of Irej,\nthe ancestor of the Iranians, are intended to be a type of the\nsubjugation and vicissitudes of the Iranian race. Selm himself (the Shem\nof the Sh\u00e2hn\u00e2meh in relation to \u00cer\u00e2n and T\u00fbr\u00e2n) is represented as\nmalicious, passionate, and intriguing.[641]\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 605:\n\n Palgrave gives an excellent picture of this state, in his _Central and\n Eastern Arabia_, I. 34: \u2018The Bedouin does not fight for his home, he\n has none; nor for his country, that is anywhere; nor for his honour,\n he never heard of it; nor for his religion, he owns and cares for\n none. His only object in war is ... the desire to get such a one\u2019s\n horse or camel into his own possession, etc.\u2019\n\nFootnote 606:\n\n Josephus, _Contra Apionem_, I. 14.\n\nFootnote 607:\n\n See Duncker, _Geschichte des Alterthums_, 1874, I. 253.\n\nFootnote 608:\n\n In Ezek. XXVII. 17, the wares, the export of which made the Hebrews\n dependent on the Phenicians, are enumerated in detail.\n\nFootnote 609:\n\n _Die Vorurtheile \u00fcber das alte und neue Morgenland_, in _Abhandl. der\n k\u00f6nigl. Gesellsch. der Wissensch._, Gottingen 1872, XVII. 98.\n\nFootnote 610:\n\n So _e.g._ Jas. Fergusson, _Rude Stone Monuments_, p. 38; Mommsen,\n _History of Rome_, 1868, II. 18 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 611:\n\n Lenormant, _Essai sur la propagation de l\u2019Alphabet ph\u00e9nicien dans\n l\u2019ancien monde_, ed. 2, Paris 1875, I. p. 25.\n\nFootnote 612:\n\n W.D. Whitney, _Language and the Study of Language_, London 1867, p.\n 169; cf. F. von Hellwald, _Culturgeschichte_, p. 154.\n\nFootnote 613:\n\n Hellwald, _ibid._, p. 482.\n\nFootnote 614:\n\n Movers, _Die Ph\u00f6nizier_, II. 2. 439 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 615:\n\n _Histoire g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des langues s\u00e9mitiques_, p. 200.\n\nFootnote 616:\n\n See my _Studien \u00fcber Tanch\u00fbm Jeruschalmi_, Leipzig 1870, p. 12.\n\nFootnote 617:\n\n _Die Semiten in ihrem Verh\u00e2ltniss zu Chamiten und Japheiten_, Basel\n 1872, p. 134.\n\nFootnote 618:\n\n This question will be found very satisfactorily discussed in Stade\u2019s\n article \u2018_Erneute Pr\u00fcfung des zwischen dem Ph\u00f6nicischen und\n Hebr\u00e4ischen bestehenden Verwandtschaftsverh\u00e4ltnisses_,\u2019 in the\n _Morgenl\u00e4ndische Forschungen_, Leipzig 1875, pp. 169\u2013232.\n\nFootnote 619:\n\n See Merx, _Archiv. f. wissensch. Erforsch. d. A. T._ pt. 1. 1867, p.\n 108.\n\nFootnote 620:\n\n In late Aramaised Hebrew we find the feminine kehant\u00e2 (= k\u00f4heneth) for\n a Priest\u2019s Wife, equivalent to \u00easheth k\u00f4h\u00ean; see Levy, _Chald.\n W\u00f6rterb._ I. 356 _a_. It comes thence to be used in a general\n signification, of an honest, irreproachable woman, in opposition to\n pund\u00e2\u1e33\u00eeth, properly an innkeeper, in _Mishn\u00e2 Yebh\u00e2m\u00f4th_, XVI. 7.\n\nFootnote 621:\n\n See Ernst Meier\u2019s essay on the former in _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1865,\n XIX., and Nathan Davis, _Carthage and her remains_, London 1861.\n\nFootnote 622:\n\n _Die geschichtlichen B\u00fccher des A. T._, Leipzig 1866.\n\nFootnote 623:\n\n _Bibelkritisches_, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1873, XXVII. 682\u201389,\n especially the theses 22\u201326. Zunz appears to have laboured\n independently of Graf, but arrives at almost the same results.\n\nFootnote 624:\n\n Barg\u00e9s, who has earned great credit for his elucidation of the\n Marseilles table in several writings, disputes the authenticity of the\n inscription discovered by Davis (_Examen d\u2019une nouvelle inscription\n ph\u00e9nicienne d\u00e9couverte r\u00e9cemment dans les ruines de Carthage et\n analogue \u00e0 celle de Marseille._ Paris 1868).\n\nFootnote 625:\n\n _History of Israel_, II. 360.\n\nFootnote 626:\n\n _Geschichte der Juden_, Leipzig 1874, I. 407 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 627:\n\n See Stade\u2019s exhaustive exposition in the _Morgenl\u00e4ndische\n Forschungen_, p. 197. But I cannot share the opinion of my respected\n friend, that the Hebrews could borrow nothing from the Phenicians\n because the two nations passed through a completely distinct religious\n and political development.\n\nFootnote 628:\n\n _Shefa\u1e6d-\u02bfAdad_ in Nabatean, quoted by Ernst Meier in _Zeitsch. d. D.\n M. G._ 1873, XVII. 609, is also problematical.\n\nFootnote 629:\n\n Duncker, _Geschichte des Alterthums_, I. 371.\n\nFootnote 630:\n\n The data belonging to this subject are lucidly brought together in\n Kuenen\u2019s _Religion of Israel_, I. 182.\n\nFootnote 631:\n\n _Semiten, Chamiten und Japhetiten_, p. 160 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 632:\n\n Equally exaggerated on the other side, however, is Tiele\u2019s view\n (_Vergelijk. Geschied._, p. 182), treating the story of Samson as\n borrowed from the Canaanites. See also Duncker, _l.c._ II. 65.\n\nFootnote 633:\n\n This fact, moreover, refutes Buckle\u2019s thesis (assuming the very\n opposite course of development), which makes history to be the\n earlier, and to be subsequently degraded to \u2018a mythology full of\n marvels.\u2019 This thesis has been estimated at its true value by Hermann\n Cohen in an article entitled _Die dichterische Phantasie und der\n Mechanismus des Bewusstseins_, in the _Zeitsch. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie\n etc._, 1869, VI. 186\u2013193.\n\nFootnote 634:\n\n Mommsen, _l.c._ book III. chap 1.\n\nFootnote 635:\n\n Holtzmann, _Deutsche Mythologie_, p. 28.\n\nFootnote 636:\n\n Paul Gyulai, _V\u00f6r\u00f6smarty \u00e9lete_ [Life of V\u00f6r\u00f6smarty], Pest 1866, p. 49\n _et seq._\n\nFootnote 637:\n\n See Excursus N.\n\nFootnote 638:\n\n _Godgeleerde Bijdragen_, 1866, p. 983 _et seq._ With him Kuenen\n agrees, _The Religion of Israel_, I. 311 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 639:\n\n Like the Hungarian national hero Nicolas Toldi, who overcomes the\n Czech (Bohemian) hero in single combat.\n\nFootnote 640:\n\n Compare _Genesis rabb\u00e2_, \u00a7 48.\n\nFootnote 641:\n\n See _Sh\u00e2hn\u00e2meh_ (ed. Mohl), p. 124. vv. 121\u201329 and pp. 139\u201340, etc.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n _COMMENCEMENT OF MONOTHEISM AND THE DIFFERENTIATION OF THE MYTHS._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. We have seen a new feeling aroused in the breast of the Hebrews,\nand gaining such force and intensity as to fill their souls with a new\nthought and impart spiritual significance and direction to their\npolitical life.\n\nIn the history of the world there sometimes appear nations endowed with\nvery small power of influencing the outside world, and whose\nintellectual mission is quite subjective, or, if we prefer so to call\nit, negative, insofar as their entire historical life is taken up by the\nrealisation of the endeavour not to fall victims to some foreign\nintellect bearing down upon them from the outside, but to preserve their\nindividual being, their peculiarity, their nationality, not merely in an\nethnological but in an historical sense also.\n\nThe Hebrew nation was preserved from the state of intellectual passivity\nby the aroused consciousness of national individuality. The\nconsciousness of individuality awoke, and as soon as it was fully\nroused, there began that section of the life of the nation which was\ndistinguished by a peculiar productiveness on the domain of ideas. The\ninfluences received from outside could be neither extinguished nor\ncancelled, seeing that to them was mainly due the formation of the mind\nof the nation; but the national consciousness had now introduced a new\ncondition of further civilisation, which caused these foreign elements\nto be dealt with in a peculiar and independent way. No doubt a long time\nwas needed to allow the results of this national reaction to strike root\nin the soul of the nation; but we shall see that a true Hebraism was\nformed by slow progress out of Canaanism, until at last the choicest and\nnoblest minds of the nation seized upon the idea which gave full\nexpression to the principle of nationality and freed it from the last\ntraces of Canaanitish influence.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. The consequences of the national reaction are exhibited in the\nfirst representatives of the house of David, in the history of the\nHebrew nation and in the desire of political unity to put an end to the\nold disunion and give strength against the Canaanites. The religious and\npolitical centralisation, which forms the program of David and Solomon,\nwas the first and most forcible expression of the roused national\nspirit. I will leave the political arrangements on one side; for\nalthough they certainly come within the range of the general description\nwhich I have to give of the character of the period, yet the nature of\nthese studies urges me more to consider the forces which act on the\nhistory of religion. With reference to this I must prefix some almost\nself-evident remarks on the relation of Polytheism to Monotheism:\nself-evident I say, yet even now still doubted and disputed, because on\nthis subject even the least prejudiced inquirers on questions of\nantiquity and the history of ancient civilisation still use words in\naccordance with the old traditional system.[642] The idea that a\nMonotheistic instinct is inherent in a certain race or certain nations\nis refuted by historical facts so far as relates to the Semites, the\nconsideration of whose psychological condition had suggested the\nopinion, and has also been exhibited as generally untenable by\nSteinthal\u2019s and Max M\u00fcller\u2019s psychological criticism of the meaning of\ninstinct. But equally untrue is the idea of an original Monotheism,\nwhich later in history dissolved into Polytheism. This idea, which\nmoreover identified the original monotheism with that of the Bible,\nprevailed almost universally in former times. Recently Rougemont, a\nFrench ethnologist, has endeavoured, in his work \u2018Le Peuple Primitif\u2019\n(1855), to find a basis for it by supposing Polytheism to have sprung\nout of the original Monotheism through the medium of Pantheism by reason\nof a superfluity of religious life and over-richness in poetical\ninspiration.[643] Of course many theological systems endeavour to\nmaintain this position; but also scholars who are but little influenced\nby theological prepossessions sometimes support it in their special\nprovinces of study, having recourse to methods of deduction inspired\nmainly by an obsolete mysticism. So, for example, the sound scholar\nFran\u00e7ois Lenormant assumes that in Egypt Polytheism grew out of an\noriginal Monotheism by the process expressed in the following words:\n\u2018L\u2019id\u00e9e de Dieu se confondit avec les manifestations de sa puissance;\nses attributs et ses qualit\u00e9s furent personnifi\u00e9s en une foule d\u2019agents\nsecondaires distribu\u00e9s dans une ordre hi\u00e9rarchique, concourant \u00e0\nl\u2019organisation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale du monde et \u00e0 la conservation des \u00eatres.\u2019[644]\nThis is the old story of the separation of the notion of a single god,\ngiven by an alleged primeval revelation, into its parts and factors!\nAnother renowned investigator of Assyrian and Babylonian antiquity,\nJules Oppert, also, speaks of a common monotheistic groundwork of all\nhuman religion.[645] But from the nature of the case, and in accordance\nwith the laws of development of the human mind which can be deduced from\nexperience, the fact is the very reverse. The history of the development\nof religion, modified of course in accordance with our more educated\nconception of its origin, appears in the main to be what old Hume\nasserted of it in his \u2018Natural History of Religion:\u2019 \u2018It seems certain,\nthat, according to the natural progress of human thought, the ignorant\nmultitude must first entertain some groveling and familiar notion of\nsuperior powers, before they stretch their conception to that perfect\nBeing, who bestowed order on the whole frame of nature. We may as\nreasonably imagine, that men inhabited palaces before huts and cottages,\nor studied geometry before agriculture, as assert that the Deity\nappeared to them a pure spirit, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent,\nbefore he was apprehended to be a powerful though limited being, with\nhuman passions and appetites, limbs and organs. _The mind rises\ngradually from inferior to superior._\u2019[646] This becomes still surer\nwhen we remember that religion begins where mythology, from the elements\nof which theistic religion takes its rise, ceases to live. For as these\nelements are always very numerous, it is not possible but that every\nreligion must begin with a multitude of divine figures, i.e. with\nPolytheism. For it is impossible to point to any mythology which has to\ndo with only one single name; yet from such a one alone could a\nmonotheistic religion spring directly. Accordingly Polytheism is the\nhistorical _prius_ of Monotheism, which can never exhibit itself except\nas historically evolved out of Polytheism. The brilliant company of\nOlympian gods is therefore older than the first stirring of monotheistic\nfeeling among the Greeks. Those who invert the historical order transfer\nto the religious condition of primitive humanity that which is only\npostulated by their own mind, and ascribe to the primeval man a\nreligious tendency which in themselves was the result of laborious\nabstract speculations.\n\nBut all the contents of the human mind, like those of the material\nworld, are subject to a constant evolution, or progressive change of\nform into something more perfect; and so Polytheism has an inherent\ntendency to further development, being indeed itself the result of a\nsimilar development of mythology. This tendency paves the way for the\napproach of Monotheism; for this it is to which the polytheistic stages\nof religion tend in their further development. We may see in the human\nmind, equally on a large and on a small scale, the inclination to the\nunification of whatever is similar in kind though hitherto divided into\nmany individuals; abstraction and formation of general ideas are the\nclimax of his power of thought. So is it in politics, and so also in the\nconception of nature.\n\nThe same unifying mental action, operating on the development of\nreligion, creates in Polytheism an active tendency towards Monotheism.\nEven in those ethnological races for whom, in contradistinction to the\nSemitic race, Renan vindicates a polytheistic instinct, this tendency is\nactive; and in any sphere which exhibits a complete and finished chain\nof religious evolution, we always find at the beginning Polytheism and\nat the end the Unitarian idea of God, whether in the form of Pantheistic\nMonism or of abstract personal Monotheism; whether coupled with the\nideas of the Transcendency, or that of the Immanency, of God; whether\nexcited by religious contemplation and absorption as with the Hebrew\nprophets, or by philosophical speculation as with the Greek sages. A\nmode of transition from Polytheism to Monotheism is found in the\nreligious system which, while assuming a multitude of gods,\ndistinguishes one of them as the most powerful, as the ruler not only of\nthe world, but of the company of gods also. This system, to which\nHomer\u2019s conception of Zeus as \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 belongs, possesses\nquite as much of Monotheism as of Polytheism, and expresses powerfully\nthe monotheistic inclination concealed in Polytheism. Max M\u00fcller justly\nmakes a distinction between Monotheism and Henotheism. A penetrating\ninvestigation of the Greek and the Indian literatures, the chief\nrepresentatives of what Renan calls the polytheistic instinct, would\nprove the gradual formation of strata of monotheistic transformation,\nwhich attached themselves to Aryan polytheism and drew it in the\nmonotheistic direction. Classical philologians have not neglected the\nstudy of the religious spirit on this subject, which prevails in the\nGreek tragedians and historians, not to mention the philosophical\nwriters.\n\nWe have noted two kinds of impulse which usually promote a monotheistic\nrevolution from Polytheism: religious absorption and contemplation on\nthe one hand, and philosophical speculation on the other. Another\npowerful force must be mentioned in this connexion\u2014the form of political\ninstitutions. This also exercises no small influence on the formation of\nthe idea of God. If man has ascribed to the Deity the attribute of might\nand sovereignty, which is very natural to him, he will then apply to the\ngods the idea of power which he has gained by experience of human\nrulers, and will estimate their power according to the quality which he\nperceives every day in his earthly sovereigns; for the picture of these\nforms his sole conception of beings endowed with might and dominion.\nOnly in the Immortals, he extends into infinity whatever he observes in\nhis earthly rulers as something finite; since that which excites\nreligious feeling in man is the impulse \u2018to advance beyond what is given\nhim, beyond what he finds existing, and to push forward from the limited\nto the illimitable and absolutely perfect.\u2019 But this advance beyond what\nwe have here is more than \u2018in itself a valuation of what we have, a\nmeasuring of it against the infinite,\u2019 as Steinthal admirably describes\nit in his fine lecture on \u2018Myth and Religion.\u2019[647] It also connects the\nvaluation of the infinite, and the quality attributed to it, with what\nwe have here and know from daily experience. Hence the tendency of\nreligious ideas is directly dependent on the ideas which are embodied in\npolitical and social life. Thus it was said by so early a writer as\nAristotle, \u2018that all men say that the gods are under regal rule, because\nthey themselves, some even now, and others in ancient times, have been\nso ruled; for men conceive not only the forms but the lives also of the\ngods as similar to their own.\u2019[648] And similarly Schelling says,\nbriefly, \u2018It seems hardly necessary to point out how closely magisterial\npower, legislature, morals, and even occupations are bound up with\nconceptions of the gods in all nations.\u2019[649] What, for instance, are\nthe inhabitants of the Hellenic Olympus? A powerful and conscious\nAristocracy, at the head of which stands the most powerful among\nthem\u2014not all-powerful, for he is dependent on a mightier Fate, which\nprevents his accomplishing all that his will has determined, and even on\nthe surrounding aristocracy of the other gods, who once bound their\npowerful ruler! He owes his dominion to this very aristocracy: when Zeus\nhad gained the victory over the Titans, says Hesiod,[650] the gods\noffered him the supreme rule (\u1f64\u03c4\u03c1\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f20\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd), and\nwhen he had entered upon it, he distributed offices and dignities among\nhis electors (\u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u1fe2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2). Are these different\ncircumstances from those of the aristocratic republics of Greece?\u2014is the\nrelation of Zeus to the subordinate gods unlike that of the \u03b5\u1f35\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\nto the members of the aristocracy who are subject to his command, but\nyet possess a considerable influence over him? Turning from the\nclassical Hellenes to the boisterous Bed\u00e2w\u00ee, of Arabia, we discover a\nconception of God under the very same point of view. A great\ninvestigator of Arabia observes: \u2018Nor did I ever meet, among the genuine\nnomade tribes, with any individual who took a more spiritual view,\nwhether of the Deity, of the soul of man, or of any other disembodied\nbeing soever. _God is for them a chief_ [a Nomad Sheikh!] ..., somewhat\nmore powerful of course than their own headman, or even than \u1e6cel\u00e2l\nhimself, but in other respects of much the same style and\ncharacter.\u2019[651] If we turn our thoughts to a religious system of most\nrecent origin, our experience is still the same. To the inhabitants of\nthe Salt-Lake City in America, God is the President of immortal beings.\n\u2018The employment of familiar political ideas, or application of political\nfigures to theocratic ends, as in speaking of the Presidency of God,\ncolonies, eligibility, race, is a natural and obvious device.\u2019[652]\nThis, however, must rather be referred to apperception than to\nsymbolism.\n\nIn a despotic state the conception of God must take a different\ndirection, because the apperception of the notion of dominion and power\nis essentially different. This may be observed not only in nations of\nhigh culture, but even in tribes living in a state of nature, on a\ncomparison of their religious and political conditions; though in the\nlatter case we have not the means of pursuing the analogy with the same\ncertainty. But, by way of illustration, I will refer to a comparison of\nthe political condition of the Negro tribes which incline to a\nmonotheistic view of religion with those of the polytheistic\nPolynesians.[653] Molina, too, found in Chili that the god Pillan\u2019s\ngovernment of the world agrees exactly with the Araucanian political\nsystem, and concludes with the observation, \u2018These ideas are certainly\nvery rude; but it must be acknowledged that the Araucanians are not the\nonly people who have regulated the things of heaven by those of the\nearth.\u2019[654] But we will now stay on the firmer ground of civilised\nnations. Let us take, for instance, the great Assyrian empire. One\npowerful ruler, endowed with unlimited authority, at whose commands\ngreat and small, high-born and slave, bend the knee, to whose arbitrary\nwill almost the whole of Western Asia is subject, guides the destinies\nof his colossal empire, independent of men. After him follow the\nViceroys of the separate provinces, Satraps, and a host of officials of\ncourt and state with accurately defined powers and in distinct order of\nrank. Whoever honours them and is obedient to them, only honours in them\nthe King of kings, and exhibits his obedience to the all-powerful lord.\nThus it was at the flourishing period of this immense empire; and to\nthis political system corresponds exactly the religious idea, which grew\nup parallel with the growth of the empire from small beginnings. At the\nhead of many subordinate gods stands the \u2018God of gods,\u2019 to whom all the\nsacrifices and expressions of homage offered to the subordinate, so to\nspeak, satrap-gods, are indirectly presented. He is adored in the\ntemples built in honour of his subordinates (see supra, p. 122). He is\nthe \u2018God of Armies,\u2019 just as the King of kings is \u2018Lord of Armies.\u2019 In a\nword, we have to do with a form of religion that combines absolute\nmonarchy with Polytheism. And is it surprising, considering the\ninfluence exercised by the mighty Assyrian empire on Western Asia, the\nnations of which it surpassed in manners and culture, that this form of\nreligion became the prevailing tone of theology throughout the region?\n\nThus, while political division promotes in religion Polytheism,\npolitical unity and centralisation help the monotheistic development to\nbreak forth. As, when the political system is centralised, individuals\nonly contribute to form a united political organism, and lose their\npersonality in special functions which make each different from the\nother, so the idea of one common god arises and prevails over the many\nlocal deities, who are then subordinated to the former as their supreme\nLord.\n\nIn the Hebrew nation likewise it was the political centralisation which\nestablished itself in the epoch distinguished by the names of David and\nSolomon, which at the same time conduced to the confirmation of\nMonotheism. It cannot be known for certain what sort of worship it was\nthat was practised at various places in the land beside the so-called\n\u2018Ark of the Covenant\u2019 (ar\u00f4n hab-ber\u00eeth), before David removed the Ark to\nthe political centre, and Solomon erected the magnificent Temple, of\nwhich the Books of Kings and the Chronicles give so elaborate an\narchitectural description. But it must be assumed that the monotheistic\nworking-out of the El\u00f4h\u00eem-idea in the Hebrew nation coincided with the\ncentralising movement, that is with the period when the king directed\nthe religious sentiment of the whole people to Jerusalem. This religious\ndevelopment again became powerful and was greatly encouraged by the\nnewly strengthened National spirit, the influence of which on the\nspiritual life of the people was traced in the preceding chapter. For\nsince the Hebrew nation was conscious of occupying a position of strict\nalienation from the tribes among and near which it dwelt, the exclusive\ntendency and negative character of this consciousness clung also to its\nconception of God, and thus it formed the idea of One God, who was the\ndivine opposite to the gods of the nations, corresponding to the idea of\nthe Hebrew nation as a nation opposed to the other nations. So long as\nthe nation had no living consciousness of its national separation, and\nhad not advanced to the point of saying \u2018I am something quite different\nfrom you,\u2019 no reason was forthcoming why the Hebrews should hold a\nnegative position towards the objects of worship of other peoples; and\nthey were, in fact, quite dependent on the latter, and receptive in\ntemper. But having once risen to a consciousness of their own\nindividuality, they regarded their own God exclusively as the Existing\none, and denied the existence of the gods of nations towards which it\nacknowledged a national opposition. The germs of this religious\ndevelopment, so favourable to Monotheism, are bound up with the rise of\na strong national consciousness; but the latter would not alone avail to\ncreate Monotheism at one blow; it only stimulates and encourages, but\nhas need of other psychical and historical coefficients. Eduard\nHartmann, who, in his recent work on the Philosophy of Religion, justly\ninsists on the influence of the idea of nationality upon the growth of\nMonotheism, calls attention to another stage in the relation of the\nnation to the gods of strange peoples\u2014that at which the strange gods are\nlooked on as _usurpers_. Speaking of the three phases of development of\nHebrew monotheism, he says:[655] \u2018With the increase of national feeling,\ntheir pride in their God was heightened. From the moment when they\nraised him to the position of sole creator of heaven and earth, they\ncould not but regard the dominion of other gods on the earth created by\nJehovah as usurped, and could only hope for the honour of their own God\nthat ultimately the peoples would turn to him and adore him as the\nhighest God, the only creator of the world. But then the progressive\ndevelopment of Monotheism went further, to the point of not merely\nregarding the strange gods as usurpers beside Jehovah, but of declaring\nthem to be _false_ gods.\u2019 What is the exact meaning of this view of\n_usurping_ gods in the growth of Monotheism? In the growth of religions\nthere is no stage at which certain divine persons are acknowledged as\npowerful and influential on the fate of the world or of a nation, and\nyet treated as possessing _illegitimate_ power and _influence_. Their\npower might be unjustly exercised, but never illegitimate. The existence\nof gods is identified with their legitimacy. The conquest of some gods\nby others, which is told in theogonies and mythologies, is not explained\nby supposing one of the contending powers to have usurped his power, but\nby regarding the conquered as weaker than the conquering one.\n\nThis monotheistic development was very gradual, and passed through many\nstages in unfolding itself out of Polytheism. People spoke of the \u2018God\nof the El\u00f4h\u00eems of Israel\u2019 (\u00cal el\u00f4h\u00ea Yisr\u00e2\u02be\u00eal), without giving any\naccount as to who these El\u00f4h\u00eems were and what were their names. Whatever\nmay be said, the plural form El\u00f4h\u00eem itself, the interpretation of which\nas _pluralis majestatis_ belongs to the stage of pure Monotheism,\ndecidedly indicates that a plural conception was inherent in this word.\nSuch expressions, created by polytheistic imagination, were retained at\nthe monotheistic stages. Like the myth, they lost their original\nsignification, and were used by zealous monotheists without any idea of\nthe Polytheism which had created them and been expressed by them. This\nMonotheism comes to light in the monotheistic turn which was given to\nthe name El\u00f4h\u00eem; and the stronger the national life, and the intenser\nthe national sentiment grew, so much more eagerly did the people grasp\nthis El\u00f4h\u00eem-idea as a national one, entirely ignoring the fact that the\nname was not its exclusive property. At the conclusion of the national\ndevelopment the Elohistic monotheism attained perfection; but from the\nvery beginning the mind of the nation lived in the conviction that\n\u2018El\u00f4h\u00eem was not like the El\u00f4h\u00eems of the nations.\u2019 The monotheistic turn\ngiven to the word is distinctly impressed on the form h\u00e2-El\u00f4h\u00eem = \u1f41\n\u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2, which is related to El\u00f4h\u00eem exactly as among Mohammedans All\u00e2h to\nIl\u00e2h. An important part in the encouragement of this monotheistic\ndevelopment was played by the Levitical priesthood, which conducted the\ncentralised worship; as also by those inspired men of action who\nappeared as teachers and monitors in the early days of the monarchy,\nprecursors of the later great Prophets, harbingers of the epoch of the\n_Proph\u00e8tes \u00e9crivains_, as Renan correctly calls them.[656] The later\nProphets, although when writing history they depict these precursors as\ncompletely imbued with their own intentions, did not ignore their\nposition as precursors. Elijah and Samuel were prototypes of prophecy,\nin whose lives and actions the prophetic historian of a later time\nunfolded his own program; but even they are endowed with infirmities\nforeign to later Jahveism; and these faults are characterised as such. A\nprophet of the Postexilian period, in which a history of the growth of\nJahveism as reconciled with the law (t\u00f4r\u00e2), with Moses as law-giving\nprophet at the head, was already brought into notice, regarded Elijah as\nthe precursor of the \u2018great and dreadful day of Jahveh.\u2019 Malachi, namely\n(III. 22, 23 [IV. 4, 5]), one of the chief representatives of the\nreconciliation effected between the two opposites, Sacerdotalism and\nJahveism, exhorts the people to remember the T\u00f4r\u00e2 of Moses, and in the\nsame breath speaks of Elijah, the chief member of the old school of\nprophecy, as precursor of the great day of Jahveh. These are two\nreminiscences, valuable in a religious sense to the prophet of the\nPostexilian period.[657] However gradual may have been the full\ndevelopment of Monotheism among the Hebrews, on a consideration of the\nchronology it is impossible to deny that it had a far more rapid course\nthere than elsewhere. This rapidity of revolution is expressed very\nsignificantly in the monotheistic turn given to the word El\u00f4h\u00eem, which\nlooks as if (to use mathematical language) the separate El\u00f4ahs had been\nadded up and put in a bracket to represent a Divine Unity, adequate to\nthe sudden national unity produced out of political divisions only just\ncomposed.\n\nThus the awakened idea of Nationality left its impress also on the\ndomain of religion. But it is now quite intelligible that the religious\nexpression thereby introduced, possessed an obvious defect, inasmuch as\nit bore on its front a contradiction which no mere National sentiment\ncould get rid of, the word El\u00f4h\u00eem being common to the Hebrews and the\nCanaanites. This contradiction gave the first stimulus to the creation\nof the word \u2018Jahveh,\u2019 the specially Hebrew term. The origin of this\nDivine name may therefore be most probably assigned to this period, as a\nnecessary result of the religious element of the idea of Nationality. An\nagricultural people could very easily grasp the idea of God as an idea\nof \u2018him who makes to be, who produces;\u2019 and it is not impossible that\nthis appellation had its first origin at the time of the formation of a\nmyth of civilisation, and passed from a primitive solar to a later\nreligious significance. But during this whole period Jahveh remained a\nmere word, a _flatus oris_, an El\u00f4h\u00eem connected with the nation. No\ndeeper meaning, distinguishing Jahveh from the Canaanitish El\u00f4h\u00eem, was\nas yet attached to the word; that belongs to a later age, that of the\nProphets. Moreover, the name itself did not at first force its way deep\ninto the soul of the whole people, but remained as something external,\u2014a\nDivine name, identical with h\u00e2-El\u00f4h\u00eem, and implying no more. Fights,\nsuch as the Prophets fought, first created the Jahveh-religion in\nopposition to Elohism. Accordingly, it will be best to lay no stress on\nthe existence of the Name before the point at which it obtains a\nreligious significance and begins to be filled with its lofty\nconception.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. At the same time with the monotheistic idea there arose a multitude\nof religious views, which necessarily had an influence on the\ndevelopment of the myths into history. And insofar as the Hebraisation\nof the El\u00f4h\u00eem-idea confirmed, and even became the centre of the\nconsciousness of nationality, the conversion of the myths into national\nhistory, of which the previous chapter treated, naturally received a\npeculiarly religious tone.\n\nHere we see the germ of that theocratic character which people take a\npleasure in introducing into the earliest history of the Hebrews, but\nwhich unquestionably presupposes a high development of the El\u00f4h\u00eem-idea.\nThe theocratic system is a league between the religious and the national\nideas. As the myths were transformed in the preceding period into\nnational history, so now in this Elohistic time, their interpretation in\na national sense is supplemented by a theocratic aim, which again\nimprints a new stamp on the old mythology, and exhibits the thoughts and\nfeelings of the Hebrews in richer measure than before. Those legendary\nfigures which at the time of National aspiration became Patriarchs or\nforefathers of the Hebrew nation, now enter the service of the\ntheocratic or religious idea, and become pious servants and favourites\nof God. Mythical events and contests which in the national period were\nconverted into national history of primeval times, now take a liturgical\nor religious turn. Not till now could the question, why Abraham was\nwilling to kill Isaac, arise distinctly in the mind. And the answer was\nat hand: he did it at the command of El\u00f4h\u00eem\u2014he _sacrificed_, for he was\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem\u2019s faithful servant, capable of sacrifice. The other Patriarchs\nalso become pious, God-fearing individuals; their adventures and lives\nbecome types of Elohistic piety, as they had previously been made types\nof the history of the nation. The political idea also, _i.e._ the\nconviction that it was necessary for the Hebrew nation to possess the\nterritory which they called their own, is carried back to the\npatriarchal age in the repeated promises of El\u00f4h\u00eem to the Patriarchs\nthat their descendants should possess themselves of the land of Canaan.\nThis was the highest, the religious sanction of the National idea; and\nthis conception the most prominent factor in the production of the\ndirection imparted at this time to the stories of the Patriarchs. The\nnational legends had only aimed at proving by documents the noble\nancestry of the Hebrew nation and the high antiquity of their antagonism\nto the nations who subsequently were their enemies; and endeavoured to\ndemonstrate that the national character and the national preeminence of\nthe Hebrews were founded in the earliest times, and could be fully\njustified from the history of their ancestors. In this later religious\nand theocratic epoch, on the other hand, there is infused into the\nlegends a tendency to transform the ancestors into _religious_\nprototypes and individuals in whom the ancient preference of El\u00f4h\u00eem for\nthe Hebrew nation could be exhibited, and the truth established that\nthis preference of El\u00f4h\u00eem was a primeval distinction which\nadvantageously marked off the Hebrews from the other nations of Canaan.\n\nThis accordingly determines the form impressed on the myths, which had\nalready suffered several modifications, by the rise of a religious and\ntheocratic course of ideas; and I deem it unnecessary to exhibit in\ndetail every portion of the matter constituting the Hebrew legendary\nlore in which this stratum of development is observable. Scarcely any\npart of the stories of the Patriarchs is free from this new force of\ndevelopment, and we should have to reproduce them all in their fullest\nextent to give a collection of examples of what has been said. It must,\nhowever, be added, that this impulse to the further development of the\nlegends is not confined to those relating to Canaan. The same impulse\ndraws the history of the Hebrews in Egypt also into the sphere of its\noperation. For, independently of the fact, that the conception of the\nresidence of the Hebrews in the land of the Pharaohs receives a\ntheocratic modification, the later mutual relation of the Hebrew and the\nEgyptian nations is prefigured in the patriarchal story, and gains a\nprototype in the relation of Abraham to Pharaoh. A famine in Canaan\nobliges Abraham to move into Egypt; and this journey is made the reason\nwhy \u2018Jahveh plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues\u2019 (Gen. XII.\n17), until \u2018Pharaoh gave an order to some men concerning him, and they\nescorted away Abraham and his wife, and all who belonged to him\u2019 (v.\n20). This foreshadowing of later historical events and the insertion of\nthem into the body of old stories is, as we see, an important factor in\nthe development of Hebrew stories. Each epoch works into the old\nlegendary matter whatever preeminently occupies the mind of the age, in\nsuch a manner as to indicate the intellectual attitude and tendency of\nthe later time.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. There is still another feature of the development of legends to be\nmentioned\u2014one which is closely bound up with an important alteration of\nthe political institutions of the Hebrew nation. This feature, though\nnearly connected with the National transformation of the legends,\nhistorically belongs to the age with which we have to do in this\nchapter. This stage of development of the legends may best be termed the\n_Differentiation_ of the National Legends.\n\nThe political and religious centralisation, which formed the program of\nthe first two representatives of the Davidical dynasty, and which bound\nthe highest power in the state to one city, Jerusalem, as a geographical\ncentre, and to one family, as the visible representative of that power,\ndid not meet with unmixed applause everywhere. Jerusalem lies close to\nthe southern limit of the Hebrew territory. If the South came to the\nfront, the northern parts of the kingdom might be deprived of all\ninfluence on affairs of state and religion. The inhabitants of the\nnorthern district were practically condemned to be only bearers of the\nburdens, imposed on the subjects of the kingdom through the luxury\ngrowing up in the centre of monarchy and of religion; for very little\nenjoyment of, or pride in, this splendour could fall to their share. And\nthen the religious centralisation took all importance and influence from\nthe sanctuaries and places of assembly in the North, which before the\ncentralisation were spread over the whole kingdom in due proportion.\nNothing, therefore, could be more natural than the reaction in the\nNorth, which spread after the death of Solomon under his weak successor,\nand ended with the division of the kingdom. The history of this division\nand the circumstances connected with it are sufficiently well known from\nthe Old Testament narrative (1 Kings XII.), in which no essential\nelement is devoid of historical credibility. All of it is a natural\nconsequence of the then condition of the Hebrew kingdom. Now it is very\nintelligible that in the northern district, the centralising and\ntheocratic spirit, which was at bottom the reason of the political\nsecession, could not find an entrance, and that therefore the northern\ndistrict remained at the Elohistic stage as it was before an advance had\nbeen made to pure Monotheism\u2014in relation to religion scarcely yet\nseparated from Canaanism, but with respect to nationality sharing the\ncommon Hebrew sentiment. Accordingly, in the spiritual development of\nthe Northern kingdom, the theocratic interpretation of the past ages of\nthe nation, excited by the centralising movement, is not merely treated\nas unimportant, but positively does not appear at all. This, of course,\nis true not only of the spiritual condition of the northern Hebrews\nafter the secession, but of their spiritual life during the whole period\nof the formation of the theocratic spirit in the South. For the very\nfact that the Northerns possessed little knowledge of and no inclination\nfor this tendency, then all-powerful in the commonwealth, gave an\nimpetus to the secessionistic aspirations, which under the strong rule\nof Solomon had no opportunity of declaring themselves, but burst out all\nthe more forcibly and persistently at the commencement of a feebler\nreign. But while the theocratic spirit, so peculiar to the Southern\nkingdom, forms a distinction between the characters of the North and of\nthe South, intense national consciousness and national opposition to the\nCanaanites is common to both. This feeling grew up equally in both of\nthem. But even in respect to this, the political separation naturally\nproduced its consequences. Nationality is very closely tied to political\nunity. The abstract idea of nationality becomes illusory if there is no\nunited state in which it appears in a concrete form. The consciousness\nof national oneness is enfeebled, if the political state does not\ncoincide with the nation in a single idea. Hence we see how eager\nnations divided into separate political states are for a struggle for\nunion, when once their national consciousness wakes out of sleep. On the\nother hand, in states formed by a union of peoples of various\nnationalities, we observe a certainly justifiable endeavour, on the part\nof the strongest and therefore ruling nationality, to inoculate the\nweaker ones with its own national sentiment, and thereby produce a\ncommon feeling of unity.\n\nThe political separation of the Northern region from the centralised\nHebrew state, produced a remarkable and very important alteration in the\nsense of nationality hitherto worked out in common. The political\nopposition between North and South encouraged also the recognition of a\ndifference in their common genealogy. As the general Hebrew idea of\nnationality found nourishment in the store of legends, so also the\nconsciousness of this secondary difference sought justification in the\nmythology. This sense of difference came to light more clearly in the\nnorthern Hebrews than in the southern. The former wrote the name Joseph\non their banner, and derived themselves directly from that son of the\ncommon ancestor, and in opposition to the southerns laid more and more\nstress on this special feature of their origin; moreover, it was not so\nmuch Joseph that concerned them as Ephraim, who is named a son of\nJoseph. We must not forget that this name Ephraim has only a secondary\norigin. For when the national purpose of the story was once drafted in\nthe mind of the people, it was developed in details in a most\nindependent fashion. The biography of the ancestors was worked out\nexhaustively; that to which the existing legendary matter offered no\nsuggestion or occasion was supplied by the restless activity of the\npopular sentiment. In various places in Canaan sepulchral caves had been\npointed out from the earliest times\u2014or rather caves which were employed\nfor sepulture; for it is pretty certain that they were originally\nintended rather for the living than for the dead. Now could anything be\nsimpler than to imagine the bones of ancestors to have been placed\nthere, and to bind to these places the sacred piety which was felt by an\nenthusiastic nation for venerated progenitors? It is generally known\nthat such an origin of traditions relating to graves is not uncommon in\nthe history of civilisation and religion. Saints\u2019 graves have as many\ninterpretations fastened on them as feast-days and popular festivals.\nHebron was a place suitable for this treatment, and so popular tradition\nplaced there the bones of the Patriarchs and their wives, and attached\nthe general national piety to the place. Accordingly King David acted in\nsympathy with the lately aroused national enthusiasm, when he chose\nHebron for his residence (2 Sam. II. 1, 11). And the popular belief\nconcerning the graves of the Patriarchs was so firmly fixed in the soul\nof the nation as to become in later generations a meeting-point of the\npiety of three religions towards their sacred antiquity. Mohammedans,\nJews, and Christians vie with each other in the adorations which they\nlavish on the \u2018Double Cave\u2019 at Hebron. Mohammedans, who place the\nprophet Ibr\u00e2h\u00eem al-Chal\u00eel higher than either Jews or Christians, have\ndone more for the authenticity of the graves of the Patriarchs at Hebron\nthan either of the older religions, from which they received the\ntradition concerning them. I know of no literary work emanating from\nChristians or Jews, written in defence of the authenticity of this cave.\nConviction was left to faith and piety rather than to historical\ncertainty. But it was a Mohammedan\u2014not even an Arab, but a Persian\u2014that\nundertook this task. \u02bfAl\u00ee b. Ja\u02bffar al-R\u00e2z\u00ee wrote a book entitled\nal-musfir lil-\u1e33ul\u00fbb \u02bfan \u1e63i\u1e25\u1e25at \u1e33abr Ibr\u00e2h\u00eem Is\u1e25\u00e2\u1e33 wa-Ya\u02bf\u1e33\u00fbb \u2018Enlightener\nof hearts concerning the correctness of the grave of Abraham, Isaac and\nJacob.\u2019 Ibn Ba\u1e6d\u00fb\u1e6d\u00e2 of Ma\u0121reb (North-Western Africa), a great Mohammedan\ntraveller, who made a pilgrimage to al-Chal\u00eel (Hebron), quotes largely\nfrom this book on occasion of his description of the Graves of the\nPatriarchs.[658] But popular tradition has preserved far more\nrecollections of graves of Patriarchs and Prophets than Scripture, and\nMohammedan tradition considerably more than Jewish. This testifies\neloquently how incomplete stories are felt to be as long as they can\ntell only of events and persons without connecting everything with a\ndefinite locality. Popular tradition always feels the want of\ntopographical completion, as long as it can give no distinct account of\nthe places where the events of which it speaks took place, where its\nfavourite heroes lived and worked, where they were cradled and where\nthey slept their last sleep. This impulse was felt in ancient times, and\nproduced the localisation of myths. Accordingly, the Mohammedan popular\ntradition knows of the grave of Adam on the mountain Ab\u00fb \u1e32ubeys,[659] of\nthat of Eve at Jedd\u00e2, of that of Cain and Abel at \u1e62\u00e2li\u1e25\u00eeyy\u00e2, a suburb of\nDamascus, of that of Seth in the valley of Yahf\u00fbf\u00e2 in Antilibanus,[660]\nand of those of some of Jacob\u2019s sons, as of Reuben at Jahr\u00e2n, a place in\nthe south of Arabia,[661] of Asher and Naphtali at Kafarmand\u00e2, between\n\u02bfAkk\u00e2 (Acre) and Tiberias. Even Zipporah, the wife of Moses, was a\nperson sufficiently interesting to popular tradition to have a grave\nassigned to her;[662] just as Mohammedan tradition asserts the grave of\nHam to be in the district of Damascus,[663] and that of the forefather\nof the Canaanites to be at Ch\u00f6rbet r\u00e2s Ken\u02bfan near Hebron,[664] and also\nshows that of Uriah at the edge of the desert beyond the Jordan.[665]\nThe Mohammedans took interest also in the grave of Aaron, and it was\nfrom them that the Jews received the local tradition relating to\nit.[666] But it also happens not unfrequently, that popular tradition\nallows one and the same patriarch or prophet to be buried at several\nplaces, often far distant from each other. Various countries take a\npride in possessing the last remains of venerated persons, and vie with\neach other for this privilege. Even so established a tradition as that\nwhich placed the graves of the Patriarchs at Hebron, and was especially\nfirm with regard to Abraham (al-Chal\u00eel), is not so irremovable but that\nit could be localised somewhere else also. The district of Damascus has\nits tradition of Abraham, and the village of Berze its cave with\nAbraham\u2019s grave.[667] The most noteworthy instance of the kind is the\ngrave of Moses himself. It is well known that the Bible has nothing\ndefinite to say of the place of interment of this prophet; and hence in\nthe Jewish popular tradition the prevailing idea is that it is\nimpossible to discover the place where rest the bones of the Prophet\nwith whom the origin of religion is so closely connected\u2014the very same\nthing as the Sunnite Mohammedans assert of the grave of \u02bfAl\u00ee.[668] \u2018And\nhe (Jahveh) buried him[669] in the valley in the land of Moab, opposite\nBeth-Peor, and _no man has known his grave up to the present day_\u2019\n(Deut. XXXIV. 6). The little Pesi\u1e33t\u00e2 thinks the purpose of this was\n\u2018that the Israelites might not pay divine honours to his grave, and\nraise a sanctuary at it, and also that the heathen should not desecrate\nthe place by idolatry and abominations.\u2019 It is at least certain that, as\nappears from the Biblical words just cited, the grave of Moses was\nimagined to be in the valley and beyond the Jordan; for the Prophet had\nnever crossed the river. It may also probably have been in the region\nthus indicated in the Bible, that, according to an assertion in the\nolder Midr\u00e2sh on Deuteronomy, a Roman Emperor\u2014a royal precursor of the\nPalestine Exploration Society\u2014sent explorers to find the grave, in vain:\n\u2018The government of the Imperial house sent people out with the order, Go\nand see where Moses\u2019 grave is. So they went and searched above, and they\nsaw something below; so they went down again, and saw it above. So they\ndivided themselves, and again those above saw it below and those below\nsaw it above.\u2019[670] Isl\u00e2m, however, possesses the grave of Moses at\nseveral places. The best known place is the hill Neb\u00ee M\u00fbsa, a very\nbeautiful eminence in a romantic situation, well worth visiting by a\nslight but fatiguing d\u00e9tour from the road from Jerusalem to the Dead\nSea; not much visited by pilgrims now on account of its inconvenient\nposition. Here, in the centre of a ruined compound, is to be seen the\ngrave of the Prophet, a great sarcophagus, the carpet covering which\nbears an inscription informing us of its venerable contents. Thus this\ngrave is not in the valley, but on a hill; not beyond the Jordan, but on\nthe Jerusalem side. But also an old mosque at Damascus was said, at all\nevents six hundred years ago, to contain the sepulchral monument of\nMoses;[671] and his grave is also said to be on a hill called H\u00f4reb,\nthree days\u2019 journey from Mo\u1e33\u1e33a.[672]\n\nFor Aaron\u2019s burial-place Mohammedan tradition has assigned two places,\none about where it would be looked for according to the Biblical\naccount,[673] and the other, which is chiefly visited as Aaron\u2019s Grave,\non the hill Ohod.[674] This last position has been brought into\nconnexion with a legend of Moses and Aaron staying in the Hedjaz.[675]\nAn Arabic savant, \u02bfAbd-al-\u0120an\u00ee al-N\u00e2buls\u00ee, finds an occasion, in his\nbook of Travels, to notice the circumstance that the grave of the same\nPatriarch is shown at numerous places.[676] Sometimes an inscription is\nfound at _every one_ of these burial-places. But such inscriptions are\nnot made with _mala fides_ by mere deceivers of the people. They are\nonly the written expression of what lives in popular belief; and when\ninscriptions occur at various places referring to the grave of the same\nprophet, the reason is that the local popular tradition of each of those\nplaces happened to be reduced to writing.[677] An interesting example of\nthis is the grave of the Prophet of the nation of \u02bfAd, the disappearance\nof which\u2014an unsolved ethnological riddle\u2014occasioned the rise of the\nMohammedan legend of the prophet H\u00fbd. The grave of this prophet is shown\nboth at Damascus[678] and in the region of \u1e92af\u00e2r in the south of Arabia,\nthe scene of his activity. Ibn Ba\u1e6d\u00fb\u1e6d\u00e2, who visited both tombs, reports\nthat both were marked with an inscription in the following words: \u2018This\nis the grave of H\u00fbd, son of \u02bf\u00c2bir: the most excellent prayers and\ngreetings for him!\u2019[679]\n\nThe grave of Rachel is also marked out by tradition, which puts it in\nthe neighbourhood of Ephr\u00e2th, subsequently and still called B\u00eath-lechem\n(Beth-lehem). This sepulchre is to the present day the object of\npilgrimage to the adherents of three religions. The myth calls Joseph\nthe son of Rachel, and we know of Ephray\u00eem (Ephraim) as son of Joseph.\nNow the name Ephray\u00eem seems to belong to the period of the\ndifferentiation of the national legends, and to be a secondary form to\nEphr\u00e2th, which passes for the burial-place of his ancestress. For we\nfind also the derivative noun Ephr\u00e2th\u00ee, _i.e._ \u2018belonging to Ephr\u00e2th,\u2019\nin the two senses \u2018a man from the place Ephr\u00e2th\u2019 and \u2018a descendant of\nEphraim;\u2019 and Ephraim himself is called Ephr\u00e2th\u00e2 in a passage in the\nPsalms.[680] The prophet Samuel and his ancestors are also said to have\nbeen Ephr\u00e2th\u00ee-men (1 Sam. I. 1).[681] This identity between the name of\nthe burial-place of Joseph\u2019s mother and the name of his son is probably\nnot accidental, but produced under the influence of the national\ntendencies of the North; and the reaction of the spirit of the South may\nhave suppressed the old name of the place and substituted the modern\nB\u00eath-lechem. Now in my view the name Ephray\u00eem was originally not a\npersonal but a national name. After the separation the Northern Hebrews\ncalled themselves \u2018those belonging to Ephr\u00e2th.\u2019 For the word Ephray\u00eem\nhas the form of a plural of a so-called _relative_ adjective (Arabic\n_nisb\u00e2_), derived from Ephr\u00e2th by throwing off the feminine formative\nsyllable _ath_ and attaching the new formative syllable directly to the\nbase of the word. Of this Semitic mode of formation the Arabic gives a\ngood instance; there the feminine ending of the proper name (_t_) is\nregularly cast off in forming the _nisb\u00e2_, and the relative termination\nis attached to the body of the word: e.g. from Ba\u1e63rat^{un} not Ba\u1e63rat\u00ee\nbut Ba\u1e63r\u00ee, \u2018a man of Basr\u00e2.\u2019 In Hebrew, the feminine termination is cast\noff when it appears in the shortened form _\u00e2_; _e.g._ Yeh\u00fbd\u00e2 (Judah),\nwhence Yeh\u00fbd\u00ee; Timn\u00e2, whence Timn\u00ee. But an instance occurs in which even\nthe termination _th_ is cast off before the formation of the relative.\nInstead of Ker\u00eath\u00ee, the form generally used in the phrase hak-Ker\u00eath\u00ee\nwehap-Pel\u00eath\u00ee \u2018the Kerethites and the Pelethites,\u2019 the form K\u00e2r\u00ee is\nfound (2 Sam. XX. 23 Keth\u00eebh); the _th_[682] being discarded, and the\nvowel of the first syllable lengthened by way of compensation\n(_productio suppletoria_). I assume the same formation in the present\ncase (though the regular _Ephr\u00e2th\u00ee_ is also used), the termination of\nthe relative adjective being attached directly to the base Ephr, after\nthe rejection of the _th_. We know further that the idiom of the\nNorthern part of the region covered by the Hebrew language contained\nmuch that is generally called Aramaism. The Aramaic relative adjectives\nare formed in _ay_, and they are occasionally met with in Hebrew\nalso;[683] Ephray, forming the plural Ephray\u00eem, is an instance. This\nlatter form accordingly signifies \u2018those belonging to Ephr\u00e2th,\u2019 and is\nthe national name of the Hebrews of the North, used afterwards as a\ndesignation of their ancestor. Many instances of a similar proceeding\noccur in the Biblical genealogies.\n\nThus the Northern Hebrews possess national memories connecting them with\nJoseph-Ephraim. It is therefore quite natural that, as the national\ndifference which parted the Northern from the Southern people became\nmore evident, vivid and acknowledged, the mind of the former was more\noccupied with the cycle of stories about the person and adventures of\nJoseph. The existing mass of stories offered abundant opportunity for\nthis, and more productive matter could scarcely be imagined than the\nstory of the hatred of the brethren towards Joseph, the Patriarch of the\nNorth. The Northerns consequently seized this portion of the Patriarchal\nhistory, and worked it out in the interest of their national separatism,\nalways contriving to let the supremacy of Joseph above Judah clearly\nappear. They take pleasure in representing Judah crouching in the dust\nbefore Joseph the ruler, and owing his life entirely to the will of the\ngenerous brother, towards whom he had formerly borne such bitter\nill-will. Joseph is brought forward with satisfaction and pride as the\nbrother whom the aged father treated with the greatest favour and\ndistinction, and whose life alone was able to revive his fainting\nspirits; while Joseph\u2019s mother was the only woman whom the Patriarch\nreally loved, whereas the Southerns were descended partly from the ugly\nLeah, Judah\u2019s mother, who became Jacob\u2019s wife only by deceit and craft,\nand partly from slaves.\n\nNational stories are created by the awaking consciousness of opposition;\nand, as we have seen, they transfer to primeval times the national\nspirit of opposition, which is an affair of the present, and ascribe a\nreflex of it to the respective ancestors. This is the spirit of the\nstories of Joseph, worked out by the Northern in opposition to the\nSouthern Hebrews. The enmity of the two Hebrew kingdoms is transferred\nto the earliest times, and prefigured in the picture of the relation\nbetween Joseph and his brethren. The chief portions of this mass of\nNorthern stories which were reduced to writing at a later time, and thus\nfixed in a definite form, were contained in the ancient document\ndistinguished by most critics as the \u2018Book of Uprightness\u2019 (S\u00eapher\nhay-Y\u00e2sh\u00e2r).[684]\n\nI must here refer to a very ingenious theory concerning the matter in\nhand, which was propounded not long ago by A. Bernstein.[685] He\nimagines the differentiation of the mass of Hebrew stories to have been\nsuch that the story of Abraham, the Patriarch of Hebron, belongs to the\nSouthern kingdom, whilst that of Jacob, the Patriarch of Beth-el, was\nproduced by the political tendencies of the Northern realm. Before these\nmore recent stories he supposes the oldest of the Patriarchal stories,\nwhich was connected with the worship at Beer-sheba, to have existed, but\nto have been afterwards obscured by the later legend about Abraham.\nBernstein leaves these stories of political tendency to fight it out\ntogether, and entangles them in the antagonism between North and South,\nuntil at last after the disappearance of the opposition they become\ncommon property and are blended together. Although from what has been\nsaid there appears to be no question but that in the treatment of the\nlegendary matter, the political situation was no insignificant factor,\nyet it is impossible to set up the three Patriarchs as products of mere\npolitical tendencies. For we have proved that the origin of their names\ngoes back to the very earliest age when myths were first created. No\ndoubt this or that feature in the _tout ensemble_ of the story took a\ndifferent character according as it was handed down by the inhabitants\nof the Northern or of the Southern kingdom; and sensible interpreters\nhave long paid particular attention to these differences. But the names\nare not later _inventions_ or fictions; they are primeval, and among the\noldest elements of the Hebrew language; and, similarly, the most\nprominent features of the stories, derived from the ancient myth, are\nfree from all that national or political tendency which attached itself\nin much later times to the ancient material.\n\n\n\u00a7 5. In general the Northern kingdom, in which no theocratic tendency\nseized on and transformed the existing mass of stories, held the\nlegends, which were guided in a national direction, firmer, and felt\nmore affection for them. Besides the Patriarchal stories, those which\nfill up the age of the Judges (Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem) gave the most scope to\nnational pride. There the stories of the true Hebrew national heroes and\ntheir heroic battles with the Philistines are found. In respect to\ntheocracy this whole age has little importance, and the stories were\nutterly incapable of a theocratic transformation. For the very aim of\nHebrew theocracy was, first to prefigure the theocratic destiny of the\nHebrews in the history of the primeval age, and then to show in as\nfavourable a light as possible the beneficent revolution brought on by\nthe house of David. But for this purpose it was essential that this\nperiod of theocratic movement should contrast advantageously with an\nuntheocratic time, unfavourable to any such movement, and that the\nspirit of David\u2019s rule should be the very opposite of the preceding\nadministrations. Consequently, the stories of the Judges suffered no\ntheocratic transformation. But transformation and development constitute\nthe very life of Legend, which, if not accommodated to the new current\nof feeling, is abandoned, and ceases to live; having in its old form no\nmeaning to a new age.\n\nThere are unequivocal testimonies which prove that to the theocratic\nmind the stories of the Judges were utterly dead, and were consequently\nneglected by it. Two of these testimonies deserve especial mention. The\nBook of Chronicles (dibhr\u00ea hay-y\u00e2m\u00eem), which we have been long\naccustomed to regard as a history written in a strictly sacerdotal\nspirit, enumerating by name all the priests, Levites, singers and\ndoor-keepers of the central sanctuary of Jerusalem, utters not a\nsyllable respecting the entire period of the Judges, but commences the\nhistory proper at the death of Saul and accession of David. And another\npart of the Canon, the Book of Ruth, the object of which is to connect\nDavid\u2019s genealogy with an idyl, and which expresses the moderate\ntheocratic ideas of the restoration, while the matter of its narrative\noccupies no determinate chronological position, indicates this very\nchronological vagueness by the words wa-yeh\u00ee b\u00eem\u00ea sheph\u00f4t\nhash-sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem, \u2018it was in the days when the Judges ruled,\u2019 _i.e._ it\nwas once in the olden time (Ruth I. 1). The \u2018Judges\u2019 time' here denotes\nan indeterminate period, whose chronology is effaced. That period, in\nfact, does labour under an indefiniteness which almost baffles the\nchronologist, and the Biblical Canon itself could only be drawn up by\nleaving an excessively lax connexion between the three periods\u2014the\noccupation of Canaan by the Hebrews, the monarchy after David, and the\nuntheocratic period lying between the two.\n\nBut the Northern spirit was strongly attracted to the period of the\nJudges and the stories belonging to it, since it felt itself to be the\ncontinuator of the homogeneous spirit of the history of the times before\nDavid; and thus literature is indebted to an author belonging to the\nNorthern kingdom for the ground-work of the Book of Judges.[686] Thus\nthen was accomplished the division of the mass of legends of the\nHebrews.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 642:\n\n Hartung, in the first part of his _Religion und Mythologie der\n Griechen_, contradicts himself again and again on this subject. At\n first he makes monotheism precede all development of religion (p. 3),\n then he sees nothing religious at all in monotheism (p. 28), and next\n the growth of religion proceeds from polytheism to monotheism, not the\n reverse way (p. 32).\n\nFootnote 643:\n\n Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, I. 363 _note_.\n\nFootnote 644:\n\n _La Magie chez les Chald\u00e9ens_, p. 72.\n\nFootnote 645:\n\n _Annales de la Philosophie chr\u00e9tienne_, an 1858, p. 260.\n\nFootnote 646:\n\n _Essays, Moral, Political and Literary_, ed. Green and Grose, vol. II.\n p. 311; compare Buckle\u2019s _History of Civilisation in England_, in 3\n vols. vol. I. p. 251; Pfleiderer, _Die Religion und ihre Geschichte_,\n II. 17. Before Hume the view that Polytheism was a degradation of a\n previous Monotheism was generally admitted. But Hume\u2019s exposition did\n not put an end to this radically false idea. Creuzer\u2019s great work,\n _Symbolik und Mythologie der alten V\u00f6lker, besonders der Griechen_, is\n based on this false assumption, and Schelling\u2019s Philosophy of Religion\n starts from the same premiss. And many able English scholars still\n speak again and again of the degradation of the primeval Monotheism\n into Polytheism. Not only one-sided theologians start from this axiom;\n Gladstone\u2019s mythological system, in his _Studies on Homer and the\n Homeric Age_, and _Juventus Mundi_ is founded upon it, all progress in\n history, philology and mythology notwithstanding.\n\nFootnote 647:\n\n In Virchow and Holtzendorff\u2019s _Sammlung gemeinverst\u00e4ndlicher\n wissenschaftlicher Vortr\u00e4ge_, 1870, Heft 97, p. 20.\n\nFootnote 648:\n\n _Polit._ I. 1. 7: \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76\n \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd\n \u1f10\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u00b7 \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9,\n \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd. Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_,\n I. 466, says: \u2018Considering the multitude of superhuman beings, it is\n certainly very natural to follow the analogy of human relations, which\n is often carried out with great consistency, and to assume gradations\n of power among them, one being regarded as the first and highest of\n all. But this idea may easily be rendered unfruitful through the very\n analogy which suggested it, because in human society the power and\n repute of individuals are frequently changing.\u2019 But even this fact is\n not unfruitful with regard to religion; for on this analogy a world of\n gods with a head liable to change may be imagined.\n\nFootnote 649:\n\n Schelling\u2019s _S\u00e4mmtliche Werke_ (Cotta\u2019s edition, 1856), II. Abth. I,\n 52 (_Einleitung in die Philosophie der Mythologie_).\n\nFootnote 650:\n\n _Theogon._ vv. 882\u201385.\n\nFootnote 651:\n\n Palgrave, _Central and Eastern Arabia_, I. 33.\n\nFootnote 652:\n\n Von Holtzendorff in the _Zeitsch. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie etc._, 1868,\n V. 378.\n\nFootnote 653:\n\n Waitz, _l.c._ II. 126 _et seq._ and especially pp. 167, 439, on the\n religion and politics of the Negroes, and Gerland in the sixth volume\n of the same work (_passim_) on similar institutions among the\n Polynesians.\n\nFootnote 654:\n\n In Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, II. 306.\n\nFootnote 655:\n\n _Die Religion der Zukunft_, Berlin 1874, p. 102.\n\nFootnote 656:\n\n _Histoire g\u00e9n\u00e9rale etc._, p. 131.\n\nFootnote 657:\n\n Thus this much-discussed verse contains no prophecy, but a\n recollection of the phases of the growth of religion in past times.\n\nFootnote 658:\n\n _Voyages d\u2019Ibn Batoutah_, I. 115 _et seq._ The jealousy with which the\n Mohammedans for a long time forbad Christians and Jews to visit the\n graves of the Patriarchs only began at the year 664 A.H. \u2018L\u2019an 664\n Bibars d\u00e9fendit aux chr\u00e9tiens et aux juifs d\u2019entrer dans le temple de\n H\u00e9bron; avant cette \u00e9poque ils y allaient librement, moyennant une\n r\u00e9tribution\u2019 (Quatrem\u00e8re, _M\u00e9moire g\u00e9ogr. et hist. sur l\u2019\u00c9gypte_,\n Paris 1841, II. 224).\n\nFootnote 659:\n\n Ibn \u1e32uteyb\u00e2, _Handbuch der Geschichte_, ed. W\u00fcstenfeld, p. 10.\n\nFootnote 660:\n\n Burton and Drake, _Unexplored Syria_, London 1872, I. 33.\n\nFootnote 661:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, _Mu\u02bfjam_, IV. 291. 11 _et seq_.\n\nFootnote 662:\n\n _Ibid._, p. 438. 16.\n\nFootnote 663:\n\n Burton and Drake, _l.c._ p. 35.\n\nFootnote 664:\n\n Rosen in _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, XI. 59.\n\nFootnote 665:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, III. 720. 3.\n\nFootnote 666:\n\n Zunz, _Geogr. Literatur der Juden_, no. 109, _Gesammelte Schriften_,\n I. 191.\n\nFootnote 667:\n\n Alfred von Kremer, _Mittelsyrien und Damaskus_, Vienna 1853, p. 118.\n\nFootnote 668:\n\n al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee, _\u1e24ay\u00e2t al-\u1e25ayw\u00e2n_, I. 59: \u2018\u02bfAl\u00ee is the earliest Im\u00e2m whose\n burial-place is not known. It is said that before his death he ordered\n it to be kept secret, knowing that the sons of Umayya would attain to\n power, and that his grave would not then be safe from desecration.\n Nevertheless, his grave is shown at various places.\u2019\n\nFootnote 669:\n\n Or \u2018And _they_ buried him\u2019 (LXX. \u1f14\u03b8\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd), as it is understood by many\n excellent scholars.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 670:\n\n Siphr\u00ea debh\u00ea Rabh, ed. M. Friedmann, Vienna 1864, \u00a7 357 and note 42 of\n the editor.\n\nFootnote 671:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 589. 21.\n\nFootnote 672:\n\n Sepp, _Jerusalem und das Heilige Land_, II. 245.\n\nFootnote 673:\n\n _\u1e6c\u00fbr H\u00e2r\u00fbn_, Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, III. 559; \u1e32azw\u00een\u00ee, I. 168; see Burckhardt in\n Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 392.\n\nFootnote 674:\n\n _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1862, XVI. 688.\n\nFootnote 675:\n\n Burton, _Personal Narrative etc._, 1st ed. II. 117, or 2nd ed. I. 331.\n\nFootnote 676:\n\n _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G., l.c._ p. 656. On duplicates in Mohammedan and\n Christian traditions about graves, see Sepp\u2019s article on Samaria and\n Sichem, (_Ausland_, 1875, pp. 470\u201372).\n\nFootnote 677:\n\n A _mala fides_ should not be assumed even in the case of inscriptions\n like those mentioned by Procopius, _De Bello Vandalico_, V. 2. 13; see\n Munk\u2019s _Palestina_, German translation by Levy, p. 193, note 5. They\n are everywhere old legendary popular traditions, which in later time\n become fixed by an inscription. From such inscriptions we must\n distinguish fictitious sepulchral monuments, in which the intention to\n delude is manifest, _e.g._ the inscription on the graves of Eldad and\n Medad, on which see Zunz, _l.c._ no. 43, p. 167. On Jewish accounts of\n the burial-places of the ancients Zunz, _l.c._ pp. 182 and 210, should\n be consulted.\n\nFootnote 678:\n\n Sepp, _l.c._, II. 269.\n\nFootnote 679:\n\n _Voyages_, I. 205, II. 203. A brief list of graves of prophets which\n are shown at Tiberias and some other places is given in Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, III.\n 512.\n\nFootnote 680:\n\n See Gesenius, _Thesaurus_, p. 141.\n\nFootnote 681:\n\n If this means that he belonged to the tribe of Ephraim, it is easy to\n understand why the author of the Chronicle (1 Chr. IV. 18 _et seq._)\n claims him for the tribe of Levi, when we consider the generally\n acknowledged Levitical tendency of that late book of history. It would\n appear to one holding Levitical sentiments impossible that a man who\n is said to have often offered sacrifices (1 Sam. IX. 13), and to have\n served in the sanctuary of Shiloh under the High-priest Eli, should\n have been anything but a Levite.\n\nFootnote 682:\n\n Consequently the discarded \u05ea th must be regarded as an inflexion, and\n shows us that the word has no connexion with Crete.\n\nFootnote 683:\n\n Ewald, _Ausf\u00fchrl. Lehrb. d. hebr. Sprache_, \u00a7 164. c; _Grammar_\n transl. Nicholson, \u00a7 343 end.\n\nFootnote 684:\n\n Aug. Knobel, _Die B\u00fccher Numeri, Deuteronomium und Josua_, p. 544. On\n the Northern origin of this book most candid Biblical critics are\n agreed.\n\nFootnote 685:\n\n _Ursprung der Sagen von Abraham, Isak und Jakob_. Kritische\n Untersuchung von A. Bernstein. Berlin 1871.\n\nFootnote 686:\n\n As the drawing up of the Canon belongs to an age in which the\n antagonism between North and South had ceased to exist, the literary\n products of the North which were still preserved from old times\n obtained a place in it, though always brought into harmony with the\n all-pervading theocratic character by occasional interpolated\n modifications of sentiment.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IX.\n _PROPHETISM AND THE JAHVEH-RELIGION._\n\n\n\u00a7 1. The most brilliant point in the history of Hebrew Religion is\ndistinguished by an ingenious original idea, imported by the Hebrews\ninto the development of religion\u2014a single thought, yet in itself\nsufficient to secure for that short history a permanent place on the\npages of universal history. The idea of JAHVEH is what I allude to.[687]\n\nTo the question, when this idea was born, the sublimity of which exerted\nso powerful and irresistible an influence over the noblest minds, it can\nonly be answered that we labour in vain if we try to find the exact\npoint of time of its origin. As the Nile, to which those who have been\ncradled on its banks ascribe a great magic force, cannot be easily\ntraced to its source, so with the idea of Jahveh: we do not see it\nspring into life, we only see it after its creation, and observe how it\nworks and kindles new spiritual life in the souls of those who\nacknowledge it. The Mohammedan idea of All\u00e2h is the only one which may\nperhaps vie with the sublimity of that of Jahveh; yet even that is far\nfrom occupying so lofty an eminence of religious thought as the idea of\nJahveh.\n\nIf, translating the word Jahveh into a modern European language, we say\nthat he is the one who \u2018Brings to be,\u2019 produces and works out Being, we\ndo not in the most distant manner indicate the fulness of meaning which\nis embodied in that religious technical term. To appreciate it, a\nsympathising soul must be absorbed in all that the Prophets bring into\nconnexion with the expression Jahveh. Shall I translate all that these\ninspired men declare of Jahveh? I should have to interpret the entire\nprophetic literature of the Hebrews, and yet should produce only a pale\nreflex of all the splendour which envelops Jahveh with glory in the\nspeeches of the Prophets.\n\nI have mentioned the Mohammedan idea of All\u00e2h. Although etymologically\nidentical with El\u00f4h\u00eem, that name may afford a parallel to the Hebrew\nidea of Jahveh, not only in its essence and meaning, but also in its\nhistory. It was not unknown as a technical religious expression to the\nArabs before the time of Mo\u1e25ammed. To the Preislamite or heathen system\nof Arabic theology, which had its centre in the sanctuary at Mekka, the\nDivine name All\u00e2h was familiar. But with what a new meaning did the\npreaching of the epileptic huckster of Mekka inform it! Through the\ngospel of the Arabian Prophet All\u00e2h became something quite new. Yet even\nin this respect Jahveh appears still grander. For, while the Mohammedan\nidea of God clings close to the etymological signification of the word\nAll\u00e2h, insisting primarily on might and unlimited omnipotence, in the\nHebrew Prophets\u2019 idea of Jahveh the name becomes a mere accident and\naccessory, and the true meaning presses with its full weight in a\ndirection quite distinct from the signification and etymology of the\nword, which was formed in an earlier age. I have already declared my\nopinion as to the period in which the Divine name Jahveh may have\nemerged into notice among the people (p. 272), and the impulse which\nproduced it. We can also demonstrate the existence of the name after\nthat period from many proper names which are compounded with the name\nJahveh, either full or abbreviated (into J\u00e2h\u00fb or J\u00e2), that name forming\neither the first or the second member of the compound. From the fact\nthat such names occur in the Northern as well as in the Southern\nkingdom, it is also evident that the name Jahveh itself had been formed\nbefore the separation.[688] On the other hand, we ought not to infer too\nmuch from the early occurrence of such names in the canonical books.\nFor, in the first place, not every J\u00f4- at the beginning of proper names\nis an abbreviation of the Divine name; if our knowledge of the ancient\nforms of Hebrew speech could be extended, this J\u00f4- would probably in\nmany cases be degraded into the first syllable of a verb, as has been\nshown by M. Levy to be probably the case in the name Y\u00f4\u02be\u00eal (Joel);[689]\nsecondly, it must be remembered that there is a possibility that many of\nthese names received a Jahveistic colouring only from the theocratic\nwriters. The possibility of this is seen in the fact that even the name\nY\u00f4s\u00eaph, in which the first syllable has nothing to do with Yahveh, once\noccurs in the form Yeh\u00f4s\u00eaph (Ps. LXXXI. 6 [6]),[690] and still more\nclearly in the conversion of the name H\u00f4sh\u00eaa\u02bf into Yeh\u00f4sh\u00fba\u02bf (Joshua),\nwhich the Biblical narrator certainly refers to a very high antiquity\n(Num. XIII. 16).[691] But at all events, we must not seek the origin of\nthe name Jahveh outside the Hebrew circle, and endeavour to explain it\nfrom foreign elements, as those did who used to see in Jov-is a namesake\nof Jahveh,[692] and even went to China to find the origin;[693] and as\nis still done by some in the interest of Egyptian antiquity, who find in\nthe Egyptian _nuk pu nuk_, \u2018ego qui ego,\u2019 the prototype of the Hebrew\nEhye asher ehye \u2018I am who I am.\u2019 But the identification of the Egyptian\nwith the Hebrew formula was recently justly attacked by Tiele,[694] who,\nhowever, at the same time, has a private hypothesis of his own on the\norigin of this idea of God. After proving it to be neither Egyptian, nor\nCanaanitish, nor Aryan, he refers its origin to the Kenites; supposing\nthe Hebrews to have borrowed the idea of Jahveh from that desert tribe,\nthen to have forgotten it in Canaan, and subsequently to have made it\ntheir own again, when the Prophets had revived its use.\n\nBut whatever be the origin of the word Jahveh as a technical term of\ntheology, the living and working idea of Jahveh was first introduced\ninto the circle of Hebrew thought by the Prophets. For this reason I\nhave not discussed Jahveism till now; which will be approved by all who\nsee that we cannot speak of ideas as existing and living until they\nappear as factors in the history of human thought. What means the\n_existence_ of an idea (as I would say to those who fancy the\nJahveh-idea to have been originally the property of a separate caste),\nif it lives in the brain or the heart of a few individuals, without\nexercising any force or influence on the world beyond? Could we say of\nelectricity that it exists in nature, if we did not see it interfere as\na factor in the life of nature? So the Jahveistic idea must be held to\ncommence its life only when it begins to act upon the spiritual life of\nthe nation. To have caused this is one of the most perennial leaves in\nthe crown of glory won by the Prophets.\n\nI cannot imagine that any of my readers are ignorant of the nature of\nthe labours of the Hebrew Prophets, and therefore we need not here\nspecially characterise their work. By Prophets we do not of course mean\nthose soothsayers, or as they were called Seers (ch\u00f4ze, r\u00f4\u02bee), whom we\nmeet with in the period preceding that of the Prophets, and also\nlater[695]\u2014to whom the young man could apply in confident expectation of\nfinding lost property, when his father had sent him to look for his lost\nasses; nor do we mean those wonder-workers whose occupation was to\nsuspend and interrupt the regular order of nature for special purposes\nand for a certain time; nor those who, before the priesthood had become\na closed institution, occasionally attended to the sacrifices offered to\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem. We mean those men who, when the people had exhausted all the\ninspiration which they could derive from the idea of El\u00f4h\u00eem, came\nforward as new representatives of the idealism, the inspiration and the\nwaning conception of nationality, which they now announced in a still\nhigher degree, and as preachers of the ideal in a nation in which \u2018from\nthe sole of the foot up to the head there was no soundness, but wounds,\nand stripes, and raw sores, which were not pressed out nor bound up nor\nsoftened with ointment,\u2019 whose \u2018princes\u2019\u2014themselves \u2018rulers of Sodom\u2019\nover a \u2018people of Gomorrah\u2019\u2014\u2018were dissolute, partners of thieves, all\nloving bribes and running after rewards, who judged not the orphan nor\nlet the cause of widows come unto them;\u2019 \u2018who built up Zion with blood\nand Jerusalem with iniquity,\u2019 in which \u2018the heads judged for bribes, and\nthe priests taught for hire, and the prophets practised magic for\nsilver,\u2019 and which \u2018drew down guilt with cords of lies and sin as with\nthe rope of a cart;\u2019 and who \u2018called evil good and good evil, made\ndarkness light and light darkness, made the bitter sweet and the sweet\nbitter\u2019 (Is. I. 6, 10, 23, Mic. III. 10, 11, Is. V. 18, 20).\n\nInto such a depth of immorality and carelessness was the Hebrew nation\nplunged by an institution which had grown up out of the Hierarchy.\nCentralisation of worship, formality, lip-service and a so-called piety\nquite mechanical, which are incapable of promoting either high idealism\nor morality of thought, and indeed discourage both, but which are well\nable to kill the most elevated soul, to cover the warmest temperament\nwith a thick crust of ice, and to blunt the noblest heart,\u2014these grew up\nat the bidding and after the pattern of the priests. A rude service of\nsacrifices, which brought down the idea of God more and more to the\nlevel of the senses, converted Mount Zion into a shambles, while the\nshameless practices of sacerdotal speculators turned the central\nsanctuary of Jerusalem, in the words of Isaiah, the noblest hater of\nthat corrupt caste, into a \u2018den of robbers.\u2019\n\nThe Prophets knew their enemies, and perceived the roots of all the\nprevailing evil which gave life to the flourishing tree of immorality.\nThey determined to dig up the tree and to clear away its roots. In the\nvery front row stood the priesthood and the bloody service, upon which\nthey turned with all the inextinguishable fanaticism of their noble\npassion. But the matter could not end here. The national enthusiasm\nwhich had been aroused in an earlier period, proved to be but a\ntransient straw-fire; no noble element of that enthusiasm remained to\nhelp a new elevation of sentiment. For, independently of the corruptions\nof the priesthood, the political tendencies of the nation were such as\nto aid in slowly but surely undermining the idea of nationality. A tiny\npeople, jammed in between great powers on the north and south, and\nitself nourishing vain desires of political power far above its\ncapabilities and sufficient to wear it out, torn asunder as it was by\ninternal dissensions,\u2014such a people was constantly driven to seek\nalliance with those great powers. But these alliances soon put out the\nnational fire which had blazed up for a short time in the temper of the\npeople. The consciousness of being thrown on the protection of strangers\nkills the feeling of independent individuality. Moreover foreign, and\nespecially Canaanitish, manners, were more and more naturalised at the\ncourts of Hebrew kings; the kings connected themselves by marriage with\nadjacent courts, and the ladies obtained increased liberty for foreign\nhabits in the midst of the Hebrews. The Canaanitish worships were again\nreceived in the capital, and soon obliterated whatever power and\nstimulus the Hebraised idea of El\u00f4h\u00eem still possessed in the direction\nof national elevation. It is an historical fact that the decline of\nnations begins when, instead of developing the elements and powers\ninherent in themselves, they carelessly throw up their own\ncharacteristics and yield themselves up without resistance to possibly\nmore refined but foreign influences. What Cicero\u2019s father said of the\nHellenised Romans is very instructive on this point, that the better a\nRoman knew Greek the less he was worth.[696]\n\nThe Prophets were not philosophers of culture; they did not start from\ngreat principles abstracted from the study of experience, in pondering\nthe course of the world; but conviction and enthusiasm lived in them.\nThey were bad politicians, but unsurpassable representatives of the idea\nof Nationality. An experienced statesman of that age would have\nrefrained from censuring the alliance with foreign powers; that was the\nonly chance left to the Hebrew nation of adding a few hours of existence\nto those already counted. But the Prophets lash this political\nexperiment at every step, and say that only the moral awakening of the\nnation can bring about a possibility of saving its political existence.\n\u2018Ephraim delights in wind and pursues east-wind, while he daily\nperpetrates more lies and oppression, and they make covenant with\nAssyria, and oil is carried to Egypt,\u2019 says Hosea (XII. 2 [2]), to the\nNorthern kingdom. At the very last hour Jeremiah (II. 18) treats\nfraternisation with the foreigners as equivalent to abandoning Jahveh:\n\u2018What hast thou to do with the road to Egypt to drink of the water of\nthe Sh\u00eech\u00f4r [Nile]? and what hast thou to do with the road to Assyria to\ndrink of the water of the River [Euphrates]?\u2019 They were the purest and\nmost ideal representatives of national individuality and independence.\nWe are here especially interested in one point relating to the history\nof Religion\u2014the Prophets\u2019 mode of dealing with the two Divine names\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem and Jahveh.\n\n\n\u00a7 2. It is well known that the Hebrew idea of God finds expression in\nthe canonical Biblical literature in two distinct ways: in the direction\nof El\u00f4h\u00eem and in that of Jahveh. Each grasps the idea of God, and tries\nto use it for the instruction of the people, in its peculiar fashion.\nThe Jahveistic school, which is identical with Prophetism, is opposed to\nthe Elohistic, and avoids the employment of El\u00f4h\u00eem as a proper name of\nGod; it treats El\u00f4h\u00eem as merely a universal generic name for Deity, but\nnot as the proper name of the One God. We can easily convince ourselves\nof this by contemplating the collections of speeches of the Prophets,\nand the fundamental part of Deuteronomy, which stands nearer to the\nprophetic spirit than any other part of the Pentateuch. Here we have\nprevailingly only \u2018Jehovah my (thy, our, Israel\u2019s) El\u00f4h\u00eem,\u2019 but these\nexpressions are often abandoned for the simple h\u00e2-El\u00f4h\u00eem, which is\nregarded as a proper name completely covering the name Jahveh.[697] But\nin prophetical books in which the Elohistic appellations occur here and\nthere as proper names of the Deity, these cannot from their rare\noccurrence serve as a counterpoise to the extensive use of the name\nJahveh. Their use can only be regarded as a reference to the past, in\npresence of the then modern view of the Deity. The immediate question,\nwhich still remains open after the results gained by the critical\nschool, in establishing the mutual relation of the two Divine names, may\nbe formulated thus: Whence comes it and what is the reason that the\nProphets occupy a position of repulsion towards the theological validity\nof the idea of El\u00f4h\u00eem?\n\nThis antipathy is easily explicable and quite natural from the religious\nand national position of the Prophets. We have already seen that the\nidea of El\u00f4h\u00eem, if not actually borrowed, was at least confirmed by\noutside influences, and that the Hebrews held it in common with the\nCanaanites. And the consequences of its not having grown up in Hebrew\nsoil were exhibited in its further development, when, after the idea of\nnationality had spent its short-lived flames, the Hebraised idea of God,\nallied with the equally borrowed sacerdotal institution, generated those\nimmoral religious practices which are characteristic of the Canaanitish\ndecadence. Moreover, the fact that this theological conception was\noriginally borrowed and not native, was the very thing calculated to\nmake it offensive to the Prophets; and their antipathy to it caused them\nto tie their religious view of the world, their moral convictions, nay\ntheir whole God-loving soul, to a name which had hitherto remained in\nthe background, but which was now brought forward by their genius to the\nfront rank, and became the bearer of all that they thought and felt\nconcerning God.\n\nIn this sense, the Prophets were creators of Jahveism. The word Jahveh\nhad previously been a meaningless breath, a _flatus oris_, as I said\nbefore. Now first it became an active power, as the expression of\nopposition to the existing evil, the centre of the new aspiration\npreached by the Prophets. Consequently, it is not the word and its\nmeaning that have the chief import here, but the civilising power\nassociated with the word, its force working on minds. This is not the\nonly instance in which a watchword has had an influence far beyond that\nwhich was natural to it as a mere word; so that its original\nsignification has become a matter of indifference. In the word Jahveh\nthe National feature is the essential one.\n\n\n\u00a7 3. In connexion with this we must not forget that the Prophets have a\nvery living conception of a Creator when they speak of Jahveh, and that\nmost of the words existing in Hebrew for the idea of Creating, are\nemployed most frequently by the Prophets and especially by the\nBabylonian Isaiah. Great stress is laid on the \u2018Creation of Israel.\u2019\nJahveh is the Creator of the Hebrew people. It is also undeniable that\nthe Prophets occupied themselves with finding a metaphysical definition\nof the idea of Jahveh, and discovered a precisely expressed definition\nin the well-known Ehye asher ehye, \u2018I am he who I am.\u2019 They lay stress\non the _unchangeableness_ of Jahveh: he is eternally unchangeable. But\nit must, on the other hand, be borne in mind that the recognition of\nJahveh cannot have started from this sort of metaphysical speculation,\nwhich does not, on this or on any other subject, naturally spring up\ntill a later stage of development of the original idea. The metaphysical\nfoundation of the idea of Jahveh must be subject to this rule, and\ntherefore the sentence Ehye asher ehye \u2018I am who I am,\u2019 must be assigned\nto a later time, when Jahveism was already fully formed. Thus then it is\nthe Prophet Malachi, living late after the Captivity, who expresses the\nsense of this formula in more ordinary language by the words \u2018For I\nJahveh change not\u2019 (III. 6). Another expression of the same idea is used\nfrequently by the Babylonian Prophet\u2014the words an\u00ee h\u00fb \u2018I am He,\u2019 where\nthe pronoun h\u00fb does not refer back to anything mentioned before (Is.\nXLIII. 10, XLVI. 4, XLVIII. 12). The second of these passages especially\nshows that the formula an\u00ee h\u00fb expresses most emphatically the eternal\nunchangeableness of Jahveh:\n\n Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob,\n And all the remnant of the house of Israel,\n Ye that are carried from the belly,\n Or lifted up from the womb,\n Even to old age _I am He_.\n\nAnd so the last passage has \u2018I am He, I am the first, I am the last.\u2019\n\nWe have this an\u00ee h\u00fb in a fuller form in the Song of Moses (Deut. XXXII.\n39), as an\u00ee an\u00ee h\u00fb, and the former is probably an abbreviation of the\nlatter. But the latter is itself grammatically only a mode of expressing\nby pronouns what Ehye asher ehye expresses by verbs.[698] Now the Song\nof Moses and the Blessing of Moses, which is connected with it, are\neasily proved by an examination of their contents to move in much the\nsame prophetical circle of ideas, except indeed that these ideas are\nalready mingled with views which prevailed later, at the time of the\ncompromise. To mention a few examples: the assertion that Jahveh made\nand established Israel (vv. 6, 15), but that Israel forgot him that made\nhim (v. 18), the exhortation to the people to remember the days of old\n(v. 7), and the reference to the T\u00f4r\u00e2 appointed by Moses (XXXIII. 4),\nvividly recall the speeches of the second Isaiah (XLIV. 2, LI. 13, XLVI.\n9 etc.) and Malachi (III. 22 [IV. 4]). Besides these passages, Deut.\nXXXII. 2 may be compared with Is. LV. 10 and Job XXIX. 22 _et seq._; v.\n16 (where the idols are called z\u00e2r\u00eem \u2018strangers\u2019) with Jer. II. 25, III.\n13, Is. XLIII. 12; v. 17 with Jer. XXIII. 23 (in both which the strange\ngods are called \u2018gods from near\u2019). If the reading \u00eash d\u00e2th in the\nBlessing of Moses v. 2 is correct, the word d\u00e2th points to a society\naccessible to Persian words; and the passage in Deut. XXXII. 39, where\nthe doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is mentioned as a\nrecognised article of faith,[699] confirms this impression. Thus also\nthe an\u00ee an\u00ee h\u00fb[700] which occurs in this passage, compared with an\u00ee h\u00fb\nwhich is used by the second Isaiah, is a proof that metaphysical\nspeculation on the idea of Jahveh arose only in the latest period of the\ndevelopment of Prophetism.\n\n\n\u00a7 4. In the time of the earlier Prophets, however, the chief weight of\nthe Jahveistic confession was given to national and moral ideas.\n\nThe assertion which it is usual to insist upon, that Jahveh was the\nNational God of the Hebrews, is therefore true in a certain degree. It\nis not true that the Prophets could conceive as the Familiar spirit of a\nhandful of Hebrews that infinite Idea towards which their deepest desire\nand love was directed, which was to them the impersonation of that pure\nholiness which is the end of the Prophets\u2019 ethics, and which in their\neyes represents the infinite sublimity after which the prophetic spirit\nnobly strove. But it is true that in the view of the Prophets, the\nHebrews were the first to understand Jahveh, and that the extension of\nthis understanding over all mankind is the ideal of Prophetism as it\naffects the world\u2019s history. If any one questions this cosmopolitan side\nof the Jahveistic theology, he will probably be cured of his error by\nimpartially reading the speeches of the Prophets of all the various\nphases of prophecy; _e.g._ for the earlier time Is. II. 2\u20134, words which\nare almost literally repeated by Micah IV\u2014a proof how deeply rooted in\nthe mind of the Prophets was the conviction there expressed,\u2014and for a\nlater age, Is. LXVI. 18, 19. This great Prophet of the Captivity\naddresses mankind in general: \u2018Hearken to me, ye islands, and attend, ye\nnations from afar\u2019 (Is. XLIX. 1); and another Prophet of Israel in\nBabylonia, who speaks of a common festival of all mankind, knows of no\nCanaanites in the house of Jahveh (Zech. XIV. 16, 17). This cosmopolitan\ncharacter of Jahveism is most precisely defined by a somewhat earlier\nProphet, Zephaniah (III. 9, 10). No doubt it is true that in recognition\nof Jahveh the Prophets regard the Hebrew nation as the centre, and Mount\nZion as the source of the streams of water which is henceforth to fill\nthe whole earth \u2018as water covers the bed of the sea\u2019 (Is. XI. 9); and\nalso that they treat Jahveh\u2019s love of mankind as if the lion\u2019s share of\nit would accrue to his own people. But on the other side it is equally\ntrue that, after the extension of the idea of Jahveh over the world,\nwhich the Prophets lay down as the ultimate and highest aim of spiritual\neffort, the prophetical view regards all nations of the earth, even\nEgypt and Assyria, as equal before Jahveh, the common God of them all.\n\u2018In that day shall Israel be third in alliance with Egypt and Assyria, a\nblessing in the middle of the earth, whom Jahveh of hosts has blessed,\nsaying Blessed be my people Egypt, and the work of my hands Assyria, and\nmine inheritance Israel\u2019 (Is. XIX. 24, 25). It is, therefore, especially\nin reference to the then present time, at which ideals were only\nbeginning to be framed by this free outlook to the future, that the\ndistinctively National character of the idea of Jahveh is emphasised.\nThis is very natural, since it was by national impulses that the\nProphets were roused into enthusiasm for Jahveh; for that enthusiasm, as\nI have previously urged, was produced by an intense antipathy to the\nforeign elements which confronted them chiefly in the idea of El\u00f4h\u00eem,\ncommon to Israel and Canaan, and including all the abominations of the\nCanaanitish worship, and all the laxity of manners introduced from\nforeign parts into the higher ranks of society. With the Canaanites\ndissolute forms of worship were results naturally developed out of the\nprevious history of their religion, and could be traced backwards to\ntheir origin in Mythology. Being such, they could not have so ruinous an\ninfluence on morals and character as among the Hebrews, who seized on\nthe immorality as such, without having had any share in the previous\nhistorical stages which led to it. If for _unbelief_ we substitute\n_absence of historical preparation_, the correct observation made by\nConstant on Roman Polytheism is applicable to this case also: that\nindecent rites may be practised by a religious nation without detriment\nto purity of heart; but if unbelief takes hold of the nation, such rites\nare the cause and the pretext for the most revolting corruption.[701]\n\nThe idea of Jahveh, therefore, according to the intention of the\nProphets, was to stimulate a return to National enthusiasm; and the zeal\nagainst the spreading vice and immorality is directed more against the\nforeign character of the vice than against the immorality itself. \u2018O\nhouse of Jacob,\u2019 says Isaiah (II. 5\u20137), in close contact with the speech\nin which he anticipates the moral redemption of mankind through beating\ntheir swords into scythes and their spears into ploughshares, \u2018come ye!\nwe will walk in the light of Jahveh. For thou hast forsaken thine own\npeople, O house of Jacob, because they (_i.e._ the members of that\nhouse) are full of divination[702] and soothsayers, like the\nPhilistines, and join hands (_i.e._ contract friendship) with the\nchildren of strangers, and their land was filled with silver and gold,\nand there was no end of their treasures, and their land was filled with\nhorses and there was no end of their chariots.\u2019 In these words we see\nunequivocally how the \u2018light of Jahveh\u2019 is contrasted with foreign\ncustoms. It ought to be observed that in Deuteronomy, the book which\nstands nearer than any other part of the Pentateuch to the Prophets\u2019\nviews on the world and religion, the collecting of much silver and gold\nand horses[703] is censured (XVII. 16 _sq._), in fear lest the people\nshould be denationalised thereby and inclined towards the \u2018foreign,\u2019\nwhich in Deuteronomy always means Egypt.\n\nMany scholars hold the utterly incorrect view that the idea of Jahveh\nwas, even from the Egyptian age before the Exodus, the property of a few\n_\u00e9lites_, either Levitical priests or Prophets; a sort of esoteric\nreligion, into which no uninitiated could pry, and from which Prophetism\ngrew up. If this view were as correct as it is impossible, considering\nthe circumstances of the development of Hebrew religion, we should still\nhave to consider the first appearance of the idea of Jahveh quite\nindependently of any such secret society. And it must also be borne in\nmind that Egypt was to the Hebrews a \u2018House of slaves\u2019 (b\u00eath \u02bfabh\u00e2d\u00eem),\nas the Bible says (Ex. XIII. 3 etc.), not a Theological College. In\nEgypt they appropriated very few religious ideas. Were it otherwise, we\nshould assuredly not have to wait till after the Babylonian Captivity to\nfind the belief in immortality among them. It is also a special\ncharacteristic of the Prophetic Jahveism, that it insists that this idea\nwas destined to be universally recognised in the Hebrew nation itself;\nand this contributes to the sublimity of the prophetic conception. In\ncontrast to the secret society cautiously locking up its mystic\nknowledge, how grand looks a free corporation, whose hopes are\nconcentrated on the idea that at that time \u2018I [Jahveh] will pour out my\nspirit upon all flesh, and your sons and daughters will prophesy, and\nupon your slaves and handmaids I will pour out my spirit in those days;\u2019\n\u2018and all thy sons will be disciples of Jahveh;\u2019 \u2018and they shall all know\nme, from the least to the greatest of them,\u2019 etc. (Joel III. 1 _sq._ [28\n_sq._], Is. LIV. 13, Jer. XXXI. 34).\n\nIt is almost self-evident that to the national enthusiasm of the\nProphets the political difference between the Northern and the Southern\nHebrews scarcely exists. The Prophets extended their influence over the\nNorth as well as over the South; and Hosea especially addresses his\nexhortation to both kingdoms, mentioning Judah in the first division of\nhis verses constructed in parallelism, and Ephraim in the second. The\nProphets even announce the reunion of the two sections of the Hebrew\nstate.[704] The Northern kingdom was naturally much farther removed from\nthe religious ideas of the Prophets than the Southern. The hierarchy of\nJerusalem, which grew out of a sort of theocratic system, might at least\nexhibit some appreciation of the preaching of Jahveism; some trace of\nmonotheistic Elohism still existed there, but was quite foreign to the\nNorth. The persecution of the Prophets was accordingly much more violent\nand indiscriminate in the Ephraimite country than in the South, where\nhowever it was not absent. The story of the Prophet Elijah (\u00cal\u00eey\u00e2h\u00fb \u2018My\nGod is Jahveh\u2019), as given in the Book of Kings, is intended to depict\nthe furious persecution of the preachers of Jahveh. Elijah is a typical\nJahveist, placed by the prophetical writer who conceived him at a time\nbefore true Prophetism was in existence among the Hebrews. As the\nProphet painted the character of the \u2018Servant of Jahveh\u2019 (\u02bfebhed Yahve)\nfor the future, as a type of human perfection, so Elijah serves for a\nsimilar type in the past. The representatives of Jahveism succeeded in\nmaking the person of Elijah so popular as to attract to himself various\nremnants of ancient myths, as we saw in a previous chapter. But at\nbottom Elijah is nothing but a type of the persecutions to which\nJahveism was exposed in the Northern kingdom on the part of the rulers\nand priests. The prophetical historians, fond as they are of painting\nhistorical personages of the Hebrew nation in colours borrowed from the\nideal of Jahveism, are also no less addicted to drawing up descriptions\nof lives which are typical of Prophetism. Such a life is that of the\nprophet Samuel, who is regarded as founder of the Schools of the\nProphets, and consequently of Prophetism itself. The portraiture of his\ncharacter, as opponent of an untheocratic monarchy, of the king who\nshowed himself deficient in national feeling by sparing the Amalekite\nchief, and of a corrupt priesthood, is only a program of Hebrew\nProphetism, clothed in a biographical dress and expressing the Prophets\u2019\nsentiments in speeches. When the inevitable catastrophe came, and the\nNorthern kingdom fell first, and the subsequent overthrow of the\nSouthern kingdom put an end to all Hebrew independence, the Jahveists,\nthe most earnest representatives of the idea of Hebrew nationality,\naccompanied the people into captivity. Then first began the time when\nthe Jahveistic ideas bloomed most freely and were taken up with greatest\nenthusiasm. In the Captivity prophetic thoughts soared to their highest\npoint in the speeches of that immortal prophet whose name is unknown,\nthe so-called Second Isaiah. But we find there also representatives of\nthe sacerdotal formal religion\u2014not, indeed, of the coarse sacerdotalism\nof Jerusalem, for that was impossible without the central temple, bloody\nofferings, and political independence\u2014but of a certain direction of\nreligious thought. For, at the very time when idealistic Jahveism had\nworked itself up to the doctrine of the \u2018historical vocation of the\npeople,\u2019 these were exciting the people\u2019s hopes by visions, speaking of\nthe architectural proportions of the new temple that was to be built,\nand drawing up arrangements for priests and sacrifices. Yet even this\nschool was considerably penetrated by Jahveism; it tacitly appropriated\nthe positive teaching of the Prophets, without, however, entirely giving\nup the positive part of the sacerdotal system. Thus, far from the Temple\nof Jerusalem, on the banks of the Chaboras, a compromise was effected\nbetween the Prophetic and the Sacerdotal schools. This held sway over\nthe hearts of the Hebrews in the Captivity, and formed the mental and\nreligious basis of the Hebrew commonwealth at its restoration. It finds\nits first expression in the Book of Ezekiel, which announces itself, and\nprobably correctly, as produced in the Captivity.[705] The first\nbeginnings of this compromise appeared before the destruction of the\nKingdom of Judah, under a king who had equal respect for Priests and\nProphets, and allowed himself to be influenced in religious matters by\nboth equally. The mark of this tendency to sink all differences between\nSacerdotalism and Prophetism is impressed on the Book of Deuteronomy,\nwhich appeared at that time. This cannot be called a defeat of the\nprophetical tendencies. It is not the destiny of ideals to be realised\nin their native form and natural regardlessness of social and physical\nobstacles; they are victorious if they succeed in forcing an entrance\ninto their former opponents\u2019 sphere of view, and modifying that in their\nown way. Now from the nature of the case, where a compromise is made,\nespecially a compromise like the one before us, not settled and\nconcluded by regular negotiation, but consisting of an unconsciously\nperformed balancing of opposing energies, such a settlement is very\nfluctuating, and leaves open the possibility of a gradual leaning\ntowards one or the other of the two opposite principles. We discover\nthis fluctuation in the self-effected compromise when we contemplate two\nbooks of the Pentateuch, between the composition of which lies the whole\ncatastrophe of the Captivity, the first throes and afterpains of which\nurged the completion of the compromise by bringing home the necessity of\nthe cooperation of all the spiritual factors of human life: Leviticus\nand Deuteronomy. Both these books combine together sacerdotal worship\nand Jahveism; neither of them gives a direct negative to either of these\noriginally contrary factors. In both books we find both elements\nrepresented, only with the difference that Leviticus sounds an eminently\nsacerdotal, and Deuteronomy a prevailing prophetic and Jahveistic tone.\nBoth stand on the level of Jahveism, without however disdaining\nsacerdotal worship and sacrifice. In the prophetical Books of Haggai,\nZechariah, and Malachi, and in the postexilian interpolations occurring\nin that of the Babylonian Isaiah, the various stages of the compromise\nmay also be studied. Observe, for instance, the endeavour of Haggai (II.\n11\u201315) to employ the sacerdotal Law (t\u00f4r\u00e2) in a Jahveistic sense by a\nmoral application; Zechariah\u2019s address to the High Priest (III. 3\u20137), in\nwhich he speaks of a purification of the restored priesthood; and\nespecially the exhortation to the priests contained in the Book of\nMalachi, which enable us to form a picture of a priesthood formed on\nJahveistic principles as conceived by the Prophet of the Restoration, in\ncontrast to the priesthood of the age before the Captivity, which was\nthe object of the passionate hatred of the Prophets.\n\n\n\u00a7 5. We have lingered over the general description of the Jahveism of\nthe Prophets longer than the symmetry of these investigations would\njustify. There is now something to be said on the relation of Jahveism\nto the Mythology of the Hebrews.\n\nIt is to be observed on this subject that pure Jahveism, as preached by\nthose Prophets who first formulated that ideal, had a long struggle with\nthe conservative leanings of the people and their rulers, and that in\nthe period before the Captivity it could not become a religious element\nfitted to penetrate all strata of society. Jahveism could therefore\nexercise but little influence on the narration of myths, _i.e._ on the\nmode in which myths were propagated in the mouth of the people; for only\na new conception which penetrates the whole people can possibly\ndetermine and give a direction to the transformation of a myth.\nMoreover, Mythology was not a subject with which the Prophets felt much\nsympathy. Within the frame of the Puritanical Monotheism which they\ntaught there was no suitable place for myths. Hence, also, the Prophets\ntake so little notice of the myths of their nation (a very little is\nbrought in by Hosea, chap. XII.); their frequent allusions to the story\nof the destruction of Sodom and \u02bfAm\u00f4r\u00e2 (Gomorrah), are accounted for by\nthe obvious parallel which they drew between those ancient cities,\nproverbial for their vice, and Jerusalem and Sh\u00f4mer\u00f4n (Samaria),\ntogether with the respective fate of each. The silence of the Prophets\nis no proof, although many wish to use it as such, that in their times\nthe stories of the Patriarchs were not yet in existence; sufficient\nanswer is afforded by the few cases in which reference is made to those\nstories. Their silence is much rather a proof of the power which the\nidea of Jahveh exerted over their souls, so filling them, that by its\nside the forms of Patriarchs and Heroes shrivel into insignificant\npersons, and the narrated events are so dwarfed that no religious\nelevation can be derived from them. This also explains the tone of irony\nassumed by the Prophet when he has occasion to allude to Patriarchs and\ntheir stories. Thus, for example, Hosea in reference to Jacob, whom he\ndescribes as deceiving his brother, as fighting against God, as\nsubservient to women (XII. 4, 5, 13 [3, 4, 12]), and the Babylonian\nIsaiah in reference to Abraham, whose smallness in comparison with\nJahveh he expresses (LXIII. 16). I pointed out above (pp. 229, 230),\nthat this apparent degradation of Abraham is only directed against the\nremembrance of the Patriarch\u2019s divinity, and that in another passage\n(LI. 1 _sq._) Abraham and Sarah are referred to as the ancestors of the\nHebrew nation. To keep alive the consciousness of derivation from\nspecial ancestors was obviously not out of keeping with the National\ntendency of Jahveism, but rather an essential means of promoting it. In\nthis sense the Babylonian Prophet\u2019s address should be understood:\n\u2018Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness and seek Jahveh! Look\nto the Rock, whence ye were hewn, and to the Well-hole, from which ye\nwere dug: look to Abraham your father, and to Sarah that bore you!\u2019 (Is.\nLI. 1 _sq._) In the same sense Malachi also refers to the Patriarchal\nage, saying, \u2018Is not Esau Jacob\u2019s brother? and I love Jacob, and I have\nhated Esau\u2019 (I. 2 _sq._). Therefore, also, there are special forms by\nwhich the Prophets address the nation, such as \u2018House of Jacob,\u2019 which\nis excessively frequent, and \u2018House of Isaac\u2019 (Amos VII. 16). These\nforms were intended to remind them of their proper ancestry, and to keep\nalive the consciousness of their national peculiarity, and thus it came\nabout that the names of ancestors were identified with the nation\nitself. The words Jacob and Abraham are names of the Hebrew people, in\nMicah VII. 20 and Is. XXIX. 22, among the earlier representatives of\nProphetism: \u2018Thus saith Jahveh, who redeemed Abraham, concerning the\nhouse of Jacob;\u2019 \u2018Thou givest truth to Jacob and favour to Abraham,\u2019\n_i.e._ to the Hebrew nation.\n\nThe prevailing idea, therefore, emphasised by the Prophet, is that of\nderivation from ancestors other than those of heathen nations. The\ndetails of the Patriarchal history are devoid of interest for him, and\npersonages without the character of ancestors still more so.\nConsequently even Moses remains in the background. Not even Hosea gives\nhis name, though he says, \u2018By a prophet Jahveh brought Israel up from\nEgypt, and by a prophet he was preserved\u2019 (XII. 14 [13]). Only in very\nfew passages, in one early prophet, Micah (VI. 4),[706] and one of the\nlater period, the Babylonian Isaiah (LXIII. 11 _sq._), is the\ndeliverance from Egypt mentioned coupled with the name of Moses. To the\nExodus itself frequent reference is made, and the story of it does\nadmirable service to the view of the theocratical vocation of the\nnation. But it is not till after the Captivity that the Legislator\nhimself is brought into the foreground, in consequence of the compromise\nbetween Jahveism and the formal legality of the priesthood (Mal. III. 22\n[IV. 4]).[706] Whatever of the truly mythical still lived in the memory\nof the people received from Jahveism a complete monotheistic\ntransformation. Jahveh is made the conqueror of the Dragon of the Storm\nand of the Monsters of Darkness (see p. 27). Notice the numerous\nquestions in the theodicy in the Book of Job, which Jahveh puts in\nopposition to the explanation of physical phenomena given by mythology:\n\u2018Hath the rain a father, or who begot the drops of dew? Out of whose\nwomb came the ice, and the hoar-frost of the sky, who bore it?\u2019 (Job\nXXXVIII. 28 _sq._). Such are the questions asked by the Jahveistic\nmonotheist. Removed to this new sphere, all the myths are at once beset\nwith denials; the monotheist\u2019s whole interpretation of nature and idea\nof causality lead to One only\u2014to Jahveh; at this stage the myth is\nutterly overthrown. But the fact that a nation which in its primeval age\nformed myths, at a late period of its existence witnessed the growth of\nthe direct negation of mythical ideas in its midst, is no reason for\ntreating the former existence of myths as questionable.[707]\n\nBut Jahveism acknowledged the duty of reforming the subject-matter of\nlegends, whenever a religious practice condemned by the Jahveists was\nsupported by legendary authority. Such a practice was Human Sacrifice,\nwhich found support and justification in the story of the sacrifice of\nIsaac. Here, therefore, Jahveism interfered, in the manner which we had\noccasion to describe in the chapter on the method of investigating myths\n(p. 45). In this passage, even in the form in which we have it after the\nlast revision, the will of Jahveh was manifestly introduced into the\nsecond half with a polemical purpose to oppose that of El\u00f4h\u00eem who in the\nfirst half demanded the sacrifice. But the case is quite different in\nwhat modern Biblical critics call the Jahveistic portions of the\nPentateuch. As it is not the object of this book to write the history of\nthe composition of the Biblical _Literature_, I cannot enter into an\nexposition of my views on the redaction to writing and piecing together\nof those literary fragments which compose the Pentateuch, including a\nfull justification of those views. I will only briefly remark, that all\nthe legendary literature which we now have in the Pentateuch is already\nmore or less penetrated by Jahveism, and that only in the legal portion\nare a few remnants of strictly Elohistic legislation preserved. The\nliterary form given to the mass of stories is itself the result of the\ncompromise between the older and the Jahveistic religious tendency. Just\nas there are two books of law, Deuteronomy and Leviticus (to the latter\nof which a few passages of law in Exodus and Numbers must be added),\nboth of which represent the compromise between the Sacerdotal and the\nProphetical tendencies, the sacerdotal view giving the fundamental tone\nto the one, and the prophetical to the other, so is it also with the\nmass of stories. Even what are called Elohistic documents are strictly\nspeaking Jahveistic in character, only that the name El\u00f4h\u00eem is admitted\nto be appropriate to the ancient Patriarchal age, and Jahveism is\nintroduced as an historical event, dating from Moses. In opposition to\nthis, another work represents the more thorough-going Jahveism. Now when\nthe Jahveistic school came to terms with the popular religious views,\nand these were penetrated by the fundamental truths taught by the\nProphets, the Jahveists did not disdain to get hold of the legendary\nmatter and work it up according to their own principles. If the\nPatriarchs were really models of religious life, they must also have\nbeen strict Jahveists; and, therefore, these so-called Jahveistic\ndocuments describe the Patriarchs as living on completely Jahveistic\nground, Eve, Lemech, and Noah as calling the Deity Jahveh, and Cain and\nAbel as offering sacrifices to Jahveh. As early as the time of Seth\ncommences the general adoration of Jahveh. The historic Israel is of\ncourse to the Jahveistic writers more than to any others a \u1e33ehal Yahve,\n\u02bfadath Yahve, \u2018congregation, community of Jahveh.\u2019 With this principle\naccords all else that the exegetical school has brought together to\ncharacterise the Jahveistic narrator.[708] Moreover, in the Jahveistic\nwritings more than in any others particular attention is paid to what is\npopular and national;[709] and, as would be expected from the strictly\nnational character of Jahveism, they are distinguished by a greater and\nmore eager zeal. I will pick out and draw attention to some terms\nbelonging to the peculiar circle of ideas of the Prophets, in order to\nindicate the closer mutual relationship of the so-called Jahveistic\ndocuments: viz. debhar Yahve \u2018Word of Jahveh,\u2019 and ne\u02be\u00fbm Yahve \u2018speech\nof Jahveh.\u2019[710] To anyone acquainted with the Prophetic literature it\nis needless to dwell on the specifically prophetic character of these\ntwo technical expressions. I call them _technical_ expressions with\nspecial reference to debhar Yahve. For d\u00e2bh\u00e2r was used by the Prophets,\nespecially those of the later times, of the speech which they proclaimed\nin the name of Jahveh (and in direct polemical opposition to another\ntechnical expression, mass\u00e2, Jer. XXIII. 33 _sq._, which nevertheless\noccurs again in later Prophets), just as the sacerdotal school which had\nentered on good terms with Jahveism, when they laid stress on accordance\nwith the Law, called instruction in the Law t\u00f4r\u00e2. T\u00f4r\u00e2 and D\u00e2bh\u00e2r bear\nthe same relation to one another as K\u00f4h\u00ean and N\u00e2bh\u00ee (Priest and\nProphet). Jeremiah (XVIII. 18) says, \u2018They said, Come, we will devise\ndevices against Jeremiah; for the T\u00f4r\u00e2 will not be lost from the Priest,\ncounsel from the wise, the D\u00e2bh\u00e2r (word) from the Prophet: come, we will\nwound him on the tongue, and not attend to any of his words (debh\u00e2r\u00e2v).\u2019\nThe same opposition of T\u00f4r\u00e2 and D\u00e2bh\u00e2r is found also in the words of a\nprophet of the Restoration, Zechariah VII. 12: \u2018They made their heart\nadamant, lest they should hear the T\u00f4r\u00e2 and the Debh\u00e2r\u00eem which Jahveh of\nHosts sent with his spirit by the agency of the former prophets.\u2019[711]\n\nHow deeply the prophetic spirit after this compromise penetrated all\nother schools is observable in the profounder piety which thenceforth\ncharacterises Elohistic writings. We see this, for example, in the\nElohistic Psalms, composed by religious singers not yet accustomed to\nthe Prophets\u2019 name Jahveh, but who now wrote to the glory and honour of\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem those sublime Songs which to this day kindle the devotion of\nthose who wish to raise their souls in prayer to God. In them a spirit\ntaught by the Prophets has penetrated the representatives of Elohism.\nFor as regards its outward manifestation in the choice of Divine names,\nElohism continues to exist even in the age of the Captivity: we meet\nwith strictly Elohistic narratives in the accounts of the Creation and\nthe Deluge composed at Babylon.\n\nBut we must refer to a comparatively late period the working-out of this\ntendency to a compromise, in which the sacerdotal view had as much share\nas the prophetical\u2014a tendency which joined together in a higher unity,\nas Teaching (t\u00f4r\u00e2), the Statute (chu\u1e33\u1e33\u00e2) and the Prophetic word of\nJahveh (d\u00e2bh\u00e2r). Consequently, the writing down of the traditions\nconceived in this spirit must also be assigned to a much later age than\nis usually done. However, we cannot speak here of any exact number of\nyears, but only indicate in general terms periods of various classes of\nculture. Accurate dates can only be reached by more advanced historical\nknowledge on the domain of Biblical Antiquity. Perhaps this will be\npromoted by the constantly increasing certainty of the information to be\ngathered from the historical texts of the Cuneiform Inscriptions with\nreference to the History of Civilisation. But from the facts recognised\nin recent times it may with confidence be inferred that the literary\nactivity of the Hebrews belongs in large part to the epoch of the\nCaptivity. It should also be mentioned in this connexion that Knobel\ninsists that the affairs of the interior of Asia were well known to his\nJehovist.[712] Such knowledge cannot be the result of the contact\nestablished by the invasion. It demands closer and more friendly\nrelations, which would make it possible to learn such facts.\n\nAll this takes us into the epoch of the Captivity. That remarkable age\nenriched the Hebrews\u2019 sphere of thought with many things, to which we\nwill give our attention in the following chapter.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 687:\n\n With respect to the originality and the specifically Hebrew character\n of the notion of Jahveh, I consider the most correct assertion yet\n made to be what Ewald declared in reference to the alleged Phenician\n Divine name Jah; for when we examine the passages and the data on\n which Movers\u2019 and Bunsen\u2019s opposite view is based, their apocryphal\n nature strikes us at the first glance. This is especially true (to\n mention one case only) of the passage of Lydus, _De mens._ IV. 38. 14:\n \u039f\u1f31 \u03a7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u0399\u0391\u03a9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd ... \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03a6\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a3\u0391\u0392\u0391\u03a9\u0398 \u03b4\u1f72\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c4\u03bb (See Bunsen, _Egypt\u2019s Place in Universal\n History_, vol. IV. p. 193). As to the occurrence of the name Jahveh in\n the Assyrian theology there is not yet sufficient certainty. Eberhard\n Schrader, who refers to it, imagines the name to be borrowed from the\n Hebrew (_Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament_, p. 4).\n\nFootnote 688:\n\n To this may be added that the Moabite Stone speaks of the vessels of\n Jahveh which king Mesha carried off as plunder from the Northern\n kingdom (line 18). Kuenen goes too far in finding a connexion between\n the worship of Jahveh in the Northern kingdom and the figures of bulls\n (_Religion of Israel_, I. 74 _et seq._)\n\nFootnote 689:\n\n In the article _Ueber die nabath\u00e4ischen Inschriften von Petra, Hauran\n u.s.w._, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1860, XIV. 410.\n\nFootnote 690:\n\n This must not be placed in the same category with cases in which the\n insertion of [ ] can be explained phonologically (Ewald,\n _Ausf\u00fchrliches Lehrb. der hebr. Spr_. \u00a7 192. _c_; _B\u00f6ttcher_, I. 286).\n See the Agadic explanation of this, which I have quoted in the\n _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1872, XXVI. 769.\n\nFootnote 691:\n\n The changes of name mentioned in 2 Kings XXIII. 34, XXIV. 17, should\n also be considered here. It is not probable that these changes were\n ordered by the Kings of Egypt and of Babylon; for in that case the\n names received in exchange would have been quite different, Egyptian\n and Babylonian respectively in form (compare Dan. I. 7). The change of\n Ely\u00e2\u1e33\u00eem into Yeh\u00f4y\u00e2\u1e33\u00eem is especially noticeable, for it is a direct\n alteration of an Elohistic into a Jahveistic name. Such a change is\n usually the simple consequence of a religious revolution, as is seen\n in other cases. Thus, e.g. King Amenophis IV., when he directs his\n fanaticism against the worship of Ammon, and places that of Aten in\n the foreground, changes his Ammonic name into _Shu en Aten_, \u2018the\n light of the solar orb.\u2019 See Brugsch, _L\u2019histoire d\u2019\u00c9gypte_ (1st ed.),\n I. 119, and Lenormant, _Premi\u00e8res civilisations_, I. 211. Of Mo\u1e25ammed\n also we are told that he altered those portions of his followers\u2019\n names which savoured of idolatry, substituting monotheistic terms;\n thus one \u02bfAbd \u02bfAmr had his name changed to \u02bfAbd al-Ra\u1e25m\u00e2n (W\u00fcstenfeld,\n _Register zu den genealogischen Tabellen_, p. 27). The pious\n philologian al-A\u1e63ma\u02bf\u00ee always calls the heathen Arabic poet\n Imru-l-\u1e32eys, Imru All\u00e2h, changing the name of the heathen god \u1e32eys\n into the monotheistic All\u00e2h (Guidi on Ibn Hish\u00e2mi\u2019s _Commentary etc._,\n Leipzig 1874, p. XXI.).\n\nFootnote 692:\n\n As Pope in the Universal Prayer: \u2018Father of all: ... Jehovah, Jove, or\n Lord!\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 693:\n\n For instance Strauss, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1869, XXIII. 473.\n But not only Jahveh, but even El\u00f4h\u00eem was brought from China. The glory\n of publishing this eccentric idea to the world belongs to M. Adolphe\n Sa\u00efsset, who wrote a whole book, entitled _Dieu et son homonyme_,\n Paris 1867, to prove very thoroughly that the El\u00f4h\u00eem of Genesis was\n really\u2014the Emperor of China! The book is 317 octavo pages long.\n\nFootnote 694:\n\n _Vergelijkende Geschiedenis_, pp. 555, 561.\n\nFootnote 695:\n\n To this group belongs, on Arabian ground (besides the well-known\n \u02bfarr\u00e2f and k\u00e2hin), the mu\u1e25addath \u2018the well-informed;\u2019 on whom see De\n Sacy\u2019s _Commentary on \u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee_, 2nd ed., p. 686.\n\nFootnote 696:\n\n Mommsen, _History of Rome_, edition of 1868, III. 446 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 697:\n\n This is meant only as a general assertion, and is the general\n impression left by the Prophetical books. There are, in this as in\n other respects, various grades perceptible between the different\n Prophets. The prophetical Jahveistic idea is not so powerful and\n exclusive in all as in the Babylonian Isaiah.\n\nFootnote 698:\n\n \u2018I am I\u2019 (h\u00fb being equivalent to the verb _to be_)='I am who I\n am.'\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 699:\n\n See Kuenen, _Religion of Israel_, III. 41.\n\nFootnote 700:\n\n Bunsen must be named as the writer who lays the most stress on the\n importance of this an\u00ee an\u00ee h\u00fb, bringing this formula into connexion\n with the metaphysical definition of the idea of Jahveh (_God in\n History_, I. p. 74 _et seq._). Lessing\u2019s \u2018Nur euer Er heisst Er\u2019 (only\n _your_ He is called He, _Nathan der Weise_, I. 4) is with justice\n adduced by Bunsen.\n\nFootnote 701:\n\n B. Constant de Rebecque, _Du Polyth\u00e9isme Romain_, II. 102, quoted by\n Buckle, _Civilisation_, II. 303.\n\nFootnote 702:\n\n It is best to read with Gesenius mi\u1e33\u1e33esem for mi\u1e33\u1e33edem.\n\nFootnote 703:\n\n Hosea XIV. 4 [3] must also be noted, where the alliance with Assyria\n is condemned in the words \u2018Asshur will not save us; we shall not ride\n on horses.\u2019 See also Zech. IX. 10, X. 5, Micah V. 9 [10].\n\nFootnote 704:\n\n See Ezek. XXXVII. 15\u201328.\n\nFootnote 705:\n\n See on the other side Zunz in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1873, p.\n 688, thesis 14 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 706:\n\n These two passages (Mic. VI. 4 and Mal. III. 22 [IV. 4]) appears not\n to have been noticed by Michel Nicolas in his '_Etudes critiques sur\n la Bible_,' Paris 1862, I. 351, where he says of Moses, \u2018Son nom ne se\n trouve que deux fois dans les \u00e9crits des proph\u00e8tes qui sont parvenus\n jusqu'\u00e0 nous\u2014(_Esaie_, LXIII. 12; _J\u00e9r._ XV. 1).\u2019\n\nFootnote 707:\n\n I have given particular prominence to this on account of the opposite\n view taken by Max M\u00fcller in his _Chips_, I. 361 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 708:\n\n His fondness for humanising God by anthropomorphic expressions is the\n only feature, the reasons for which are not patent.\n\nFootnote 709:\n\n See Knobel, _Die B\u00fccher Numeri, Deuteronomium und Josua_, pp. 539,\n 554.\n\nFootnote 710:\n\n See Knobel, _Die B\u00fccher etc._, p. 529.\n\nFootnote 711:\n\n The relative clause is dependent upon _Debhar\u00eem_ only.\n\nFootnote 712:\n\n See Knobel, _Die B\u00fccher etc._, p. 579.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER X.\n _THE HEBREW MYTH IN THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY._\n\n\nIf we limit the term _Myth_ to those old sentences which the ancients\nused in speaking of physical changes and phenomena, then the period with\nwhich we have to do in this chapter lies outside the history of the\nHebrew Myth; for the latter ceased to have any further growth to\nchronicle as the influence of Prophetism extended. Now, in place of the\nfree life, organic development and gradual transformation of the myth,\nwe have it in a final and canonical literary form, which we had to use\nas the only accessible source for discovering the original, and as a\nhandle to guide us in the analytical treatment of its development. But\nit is not to be supposed that the parts of the Old Testament which we\nuse as sources of knowledge on the Hebrew Myth contain the entire stock\nof the mythical treasures of the Hebrews, which these very fragments\nprove to have been very various. It must rather be assumed that in the\nperiod separating the final elaboration of these myths from their\nultimate reduction to writing, a large portion of the stock was lost;\nwhich seems particularly likely, when it is considered how little\nimportance the new religious school attached to this aspect of the\nHebrew mind. Some remnants of unwritten stories have been preserved in\nTradition; but the Tradition, again, has come down to us in a form which\nmakes it difficult to discriminate the truly traditional from what\nbelongs only to individuals (see _supra_, pp. 32, 33).\n\nThus the history of the Hebrew Myth after the rise of the Prophets can\nonly be treated as a portion of the history of literature; _i.e._ it\nendeavours to discover the influences to which the stories were\nsubjected during their reduction to writing. And at the outset we\nexcluded all such investigations from the circle of our present studies.\n\nBut after the cessation of Hebrew independence the cycle of Hebrew\nstories received from another quarter an addition, which, though neither\ntouching the domain of Mythology proper, nor working with elements\nalready furnished by the Hebrew Myth, nevertheless is attached so\nclosely to those stories which were formed by transformation of the old\nmyths, that it ought not to be passed over in silence when we are\nconsidering the cycle of Hebrew stories.\n\nWe have already had occasion to observe the receptive tendency of the\nHebrew mind, which was manifested in its contact with Canaanitish\ncivilisation. At the first assault made by a mind superior to itself, it\nwillingly opened its gates, and even when struggling for its national\ncharacter and individuality it did not spurn the intellectual property\nof its antagonists. In the formation of the thought of Jahveh, and\nespecially of the central idea of that thought, we discovered a\nproductive genius for the first time aroused in the Hebrew people. But\nJahveism came upon a nation too far gone in political impotence and\ndissension to be kindled even by such a spark to spiritual action. It\nfound the nation at the very threshold of that political division which\nnot long afterwards it had to lament beside the streams of Babylon.\nThere the prophetic idea lived on, and indeed reached its zenith in the\nBabylonian Isaiah. But hieratic influences also continued to operate;\nand the best that the people could effect was the compromise between\nJahveism and the sacerdotal tendencies represented by Ezekiel. This\ncompromise found expression at the restoration of the State, and gave\nits tone and colour to the larger portion of the Biblical literature.\n\nThe receptive tendency of the Hebrews manifested itself again\nprominently during the Babylonian Captivity. Here first they gained an\nopportunity of forming for themselves a complete and harmonious\nconception of the world. The influence of Canaanitish civilisation could\nnot then be particularly powerful on the Hebrews; for that civilisation,\nthe highest point of which was attained by the Phenicians, was quite\ndwarfed by the mental activity exhibited in the monuments of the\nBabylonian and Assyrian Empire, which we are now able to admire in all\ntheir grandeur. There the Hebrews found more to receive than some few\ncivil, political, and religious institutions. The extensive and manifold\nliterature which they found there could not but act on a receptive mind\nas a powerful stimulus; for it is not to be imagined that the nation\nwhen dragged into captivity lived so long in the Babylonian-Assyrian\nEmpire without gaining any knowledge of its intellectual treasures.\nSchrader\u2019s latest publications on Assyrian poetry have enabled us to\nestablish a striking similarity between both the course of ideas and the\npoetical form of a considerable portion of the Old Testament, especially\nof the Psalms, and those of this newly-discovered Assyrian poetry.[713]\nIt would be a great mistake to account for this similarity by reference\nto a common Semitic origin in primeval times; for we can only resort to\nthat in cases which do not go beyond the most primitive elements of\nintellectual life and ideas of the world, or designations of things of\nthe external world. Conceptions of a higher and more complicated kind,\nas well as esthetic points, can certainly not be carried off into the\nmists of a prehistoric age. It is much better to keep to more real and\ntangible ground, and to suppose those points of contact between Hebrew\nand Assyrian poetry which are revealed by Schrader\u2019s, Lenormant\u2019s, and\nGeorge Smith\u2019s publications, to form part of the contributions made by\nthe highly civilised Babylonians and Assyrians to the Hebrews in the\ncourse of the important period of the Captivity.\n\nWe see from this that the intellect of Babylon and Assyria exerted a\nmore than passing influence on that of the Hebrews, not merely touching\nit, but entering deep into it and leaving its own impress upon it. The\nAssyrian poetry of the kind just mentioned stands in the same relation\nto that of the Hebrews as does the plain narrative of King Mesha\u2019s\nInscription and of some Phenician votive tablets to the narrative texts\nof the Hebrews, and as does the sacrificial Tablet of Marseilles to the\nHebrews\u2019 beginnings of a sacerdotal constitution. The Babylonian and\nAssyrian influence is of course much more extensive, pregnant and\nnoteworthy.\n\nThe most prominent monument of this important influence is presented to\nus in the Biblical story of the Deluge. It was attempted long ago to\ndiscover points of contact between the respective narratives of the\nuniversal flood by the guidance of Berosus; but the only possible result\nof these endeavours was to encourage the old theory of an idea common to\nall mankind, which expressed itself in the story of a great general\nflood. To be sure, no obvious reason appears why this idea should force\nitself unbidden upon the reflexion of ancient humanity. For, with all\nthat we know of the oldest subjects of the thought of mankind from the\nunquestioned results of Comparative Mythology, we must ask why the idea\nof an all-destroying flood, or even of a partial one confined to a\nlimited territory, should necessarily occupy the foreground in the\noldest picture of the world? In point of fact, a great number of nations\nare found destitute of any story of a flood. For instance, the oldest\nGreek mythology has no such idea; it cannot be proved to have been known\nto the Greeks earlier than the sixth century B.C. Whether it is\nindigenous and of high antiquity in India has also been doubted by\ndistinguished scholars.[714]\n\nOn the other hand, the Cuneiform original of the Assyrian story of the\nDeluge, discovered by George Smith, has so much similarity, or we may\nrather say congruity, with the form of the story preserved in the Bible,\neven with respect to the raven and the dove,[715] that we are entitled\nto express an opinion _a priori_ on these two narratives, to the effect\nthat they point to a greater community of formation than would be the\ncase if the community dated from the primeval Semitic age. For in that\ncase, supposing the elements of the Deluge-story to have been so fully\ndeveloped in the earliest Semitic age as we find them in the Bible and\nthe Cuneiform Inscriptions, we must find something similar in all other\nSemitic nations also. It would be almost unaccountable why nothing can\nbe traced among the Phenicians that could be placed side by side with\nthis Deluge-story, and would be the more extraordinary if the conception\nof such a story took place in the age when the North-Semitic tribes were\nstill living together.\n\nThe conclusion is accordingly almost irresistible, that the Hebrews\nborrowed this whole story of the Deluge from the Babylonians, and\npropagated it in a form resembling the Babylonian original, even in its\ndetails and mode of expression. Moreover, Babylon is the district most\nof all suited to the working-out of a story of Deluge; for it is certain\nfrom Von Bohlen\u2019s and Tuch\u2019s demonstrations, that such fully developed\nstories of floods can only occur in nations which have in their\nterritory rivers liable to great overflows. Consequently the region of\nthe great twin streams of Mesopotamia is the most likely cradle for an\nelaborate Deluge story.[716] A.H. Sayce, one of the most eminent English\nAssyriologists, in the _Theological Review_ of July 1873, propounds the\nview that the Biblical account of the Deluge consists of two narratives:\nthe older being Elohistic and based on a Hebrew Deluge-story, the other\nbeing placed by its side by a Jahveistic narrator in the Babylonian\nCaptivity, and being identical with the Babylonian story preserved in\nthe document consulted by George Smith.[717] Now, independently of the\ndoubt as to the existence of an exclusively Hebrew Deluge-story, and of\nthe fact that identity with the Babylonian stories has been proved of\nthe Elohistic account also,[718] even Sayce\u2019s conception of the matter\nquite suffices to establish the view that the Hebrews in Babylonia at\nleast amplified, if they did not actually construct, the Biblical story\nof the Deluge. It cannot be true, as Max Duncker[719] lately wrote,\n\u2018that these stories present to us an _ancient_ and _common_ possession\nof the Semitic tribes of the Euphrates and Tigris country.\u2019 We cannot\nassume that in those primeval, prehistoric times when the Semitic\ntribes, or at least the Northern group of that race, lived all together\nbefore the separation, it matters not where, they formed in common\nstories which presuppose a high and advanced view of the world, like the\nCosmogonies and the story of the Deluge connected therewith. At that\nearliest stage of human life, man labours with far simpler apperceptions\nthan those which are requisite to form such stories. The myth in its\nvery earliest mould, in which it is connected with the formation of\nlanguage, occupies him first. But at all events, the Babylonian story\nreceived in its Hebrew transformation a purification in a monotheistic\nsense; or as Duncker himself appropriately adds, \u2018the account of the\nDeluge lies before us in a purer and more dignified shape in the\nwritings of the Hebrews.\u2019\n\nI showed in a previous section that Noah is one of those Solar figures\nof which the Biblical source has still preserved some mythical features.\nThere is no intrinsic reason why the story of the Deluge should be\nparticularly tacked on to the person of Noah; the Assyrian tablets give\nHasisadra as the name of the man saved from the flood. If the connexion\nof Noah with the Deluge were to be maintained at all hazards, it would\nbe best to argue that ancient mythical traditions called him (as well as\nAdam) the progenitor of the human race; the other Solar figures\ngenerally assume a position hostile to the nation. The harmonising\ntendency, which I have already had occasion to notice, might then easily\nmake use of Noah as hero for the story of the Deluge learned at Babylon,\nsince here was an excellent opportunity to establish his title as\nancestor of the human race. But it may be taken for granted that this\nuse was made of Noah\u2019s name, not only at the later period when the\nDeluge-story was inserted in the great mass of traditional stories, but\nas soon as ever the Babylonian story was borrowed by the Hebrews. This\nis guaranteed by the Prophet of the Captivity, who calls the Deluge m\u00ea\nN\u00f4ach \u2018the water of Noah.\u2019 \u2018For like the water of Noah is this (thy\ndistress) unto me, of which (water) I swore against the water of Noah\ncoming again over the earth [Gen. VIII. 21 _et seq._]: so do I swear\nagainst being wroth with thee and rebuking thee\u2019 (Is. LIV. 9). In\nBabylon, also, the Hebrews appear to have received an impulse to work\nout such a history of Creation, intricate and plastically jointed, as is\ncontained in the opening passages of Genesis. I do not mean that the\ncosmogony of the Babylonians was the original from which that of the\nBible was copied, for in this particular matter of cosmogonies the\nconstruction of the Biblical account exhibits great individuality. But\nthe tendency of the mind to inquire after the first beginning of both\nthe physical and the moral order of the world was first fully roused\nduring the residence at Babylon, so far advanced in speculations of this\nnature. I am confirmed in this assumption by the Babylonian story of\nCreation, lately discovered and edited by George Smith, which, as\npresented by that learned pioneer, shows great accordance with the\ncorresponding account in Genesis.[720] It is at all events an element of\nthe subject in hand which cannot be left unnoticed, that the notion of\nthe b\u00f4r\u00ea and y\u00f4\u1e63\u00ear \u2018Creator\u2019 (the terms used in the cosmogony in\nGenesis), as an integral part of the idea of God, are first brought into\ncommon usage by the Prophets of the Captivity, especially the Babylonian\nIsaiah, who is particularly fond of the expression b\u00f4r\u00ea.[721] The older\nProphets also know Jahveh as Creator of the world; but it is\nself-evident that they do not so strongly emphasise the idea, or refer\nto it so frequently, as for instance the Isaiah of the Captivity. Amos\nIV. 13, for example, says, \u2018For lo, he that formeth mountains and\ncreateth wind, and declareth to man what is his meditation, that maketh\nthe dawn winged and walketh on the high places of the earth\u2014his name is\nJahveh the God of Hosts.\u2019 This passage stands in no relation whatever to\nthe cosmogony of Genesis; indeed, in speaking of the dawn as gifted with\nwings (see _supra_, p. 116), it refers rather to the mythical\nconceptions of antiquity, as also the older Isaiah frequently does. The\nProphet of the Captivity, on the other hand, refers to the ideas of the\ncosmogony in Genesis, as is clear in Is. XL. 26, XLV. 7 (where he speaks\nof the Creator of light and darkness), XLII. 5, XLV. 18, especially this\nlast passage, which refers to the banishment of the t\u00f4h\u00fb through the act\nof creation. By the story of creation the celebration of the Sabbath was\nestablished on entirely new grounds. Whilst in the older conception\n(which finds expression in the Decalogue in Deuteronomy V. 15) the\nSabbath has a purely theocratic significance, and is intended to remind\nthe Hebrews of their miraculous deliverance from Egyptian slavery after\nlong servitude, the later version of the Decalogue (Ex. XX. 11)\njustifies it by referring to the history of the Creation, in which after\nsix days of work the Creator took rest.\n\nWe cannot here enter into the question of the geographical position of\nthe \u02bf\u00caden of the Bible, nor even inquire whether the original of the\nidea of Eden is found in the corresponding feature of Iranian tradition;\nbut it may be assumed that the Biblical account of Eden also arose at\nBabylon. It may indeed be generally presumed that the Biblical accounts\nof the Cosmogony and the origin of all things had not, like the matter\nof the old mythology, lived a long life of perhaps many thousand years\nin the mouths of successive generations, before the first beginnings of\nliterary record were reached. On the contrary, we find in these parts of\nthe Bible so artistic a perfection of description, such a harmonious\nroundness of narrative, that we are justified in presuming that they\nwere not preceded by the oral concatenations of a long life of\ntradition, but are rather sublime imaginations which were written down\nsoon after they were conceived in the educated circles of the nation, so\nas to become the common property of the whole people. There was in this\na double stimulus received from the Babylonians: first, to meditate on\nthe earliest things\u2014the origin of the world, man, and other things of a\ngeneral nature\u2014and secondly, to produce writings on these things. The\nProphets of the Hebrews at Babylon unquestionably exercised a great\ninfluence on the production of these narratives, and gladly admitted\nwhatever tended to promote the deepening of the idea of Jahveh, as\nelements in their religions conception of the world. For the Prophet did\nnot occupy a position towards the masses like the member of a\ncorporation which opposes the people; he grew up out of the people, and\nraised himself above them by his individual power of thought. Yet it is\neasily intelligible that the Prophet, while gladly appropriating the\nidea of Jahveh as b\u00f4r\u00ea \u2018Creator,\u2019 would not set much store by the petty\ndetails of the cosmogonic imagination. The second Isaiah, the Prophet of\nBabylon _par excellence_, goes so far as to exhort his people, \u2018Record\nye not beginnings, and antiquities contemplate ye not\u2019 (Is. XLIII. 18);\nstill he does not go into open opposition to this mental tendency, and\nsees nothing dangerous in it\u2014the less so, as he has himself\nunconsciously adopted its conclusions and often employed them in his\nmasterly addresses.\n\nThus also the story of the Garden of Eden, as a supplement to the\nhistory of the Creation, was written down at Babylon, and therefore not\nlong after the previous stories. A reference to the passage in Gen. II.\n14, where the first three of the four rivers of the garden of Eden have\ntheir geographical position accurately defined, but the fourth is only\nmentioned by the words, \u2018And the fourth river is Per\u00e2th (Euphrates),\u2019 is\nof itself sufficient to show that those for whom the story was written\nmust have known the Euphrates as their own river, requiring no further\ndesignation, and consequently that this must have been written on its\nbanks. Now, although the expression \u2018Garden of Eden\u2019 occurs also before\nthe Captivity (Joel II. 3), yet the Prophets of the Captivity make the\nfirst reference to that character and quality of Eden which is\nconspicuous in Genesis. In Joel\u2019s words only the general idea of a\n\u2018pleasure-garden\u2019 appears to be connected with the name Eden. But in\nEzekiel (especially frequently in Chap. XXXI.) we find the appellation\n\u2018Garden of God\u2019 used to designate Eden more fully; and in the\nparallelism of the members of the verse the Babylonian Isaiah (LI. 3)\nputs the \u2018Garden of Jahveh\u2019 in the succeeding member to correspond to\n\u2018Eden\u2019 in the preceding:\n\n He makes her desert like _Eden_,\n And her dry land like the _Garden of Jahveh_.\n\nIt is also evident from the same Prophet\u2019s words (Is. XLIII. 27), \u2018Thy\nfirst father sinned,\u2019 that he connected the story of the Fall with Eden,\nor at least that he knew the story. The mention of the doctrine of the\nFall takes us to a domain which has a close connexion with the subject\nof this chapter. I refer to the ideas of dogmatic religion pervading the\nstories formed during the Captivity, which subsequently, while the canon\nof Scripture was being drawn up, were admitted even into those parts of\nScripture whose matter dated from an earlier period, came into full life\nin the second Hebrew commonwealth, and continued to live in the later\nJewish Synagogue. Through the growth of Persian power and Persian\ninfluence in Western Asia, where there existed many states in a\ncondition of vassalage to Babylon, the Iranian views of religion could\nnot but exert a great influence on the parent-state also, even before\nBabylon was quite overwhelmed by them through its conquest by Cyrus at\nthe end of the Captivity of the Hebrews. Opportunity was therefore not\nwanting to the Hebrews to become well acquainted with the main ideas of\nIranian theology; and desire was also present, as their minds were then\nintent upon obtaining clear views on the origin of the physical and\nmoral order of the world, and on the chief questions concerning the\n\u2018Origins.\u2019 This influence of the Iranians on the Hebrews was exhibited\nnot only in relation to matter, but also to forms. For there is great\nprobability in favour of the idea, that the first suggestion to codify\nthe sacerdotal laws of sacrifice, purification and others, came to the\nHebrews from the example of the Persians.[722] One portion of these\nideas has found a place in the Babylonian sections of Genesis\u2014that which\nbelonged to the cosmogony; others were not expressed in the Canon at\nall, but lived in tradition, until tradition itself was fixed in\nwriting. This question, which would at last shed light on the details of\nIranian influence on the narratives of the Pentateuch, is perversely\nenough not grappled with at its starting-point by many persons who\nlabour with nervous eagerness to discover in the Iranian writings every\nletter of the Jewish Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, even in cases in which such a proceeding is\nutterly unjustifiable, and borrowing can only be suggested through the\nwildest guesswork. Equally perverse is the unhistorical assumption,\nwhich point-blank denies the very possibility of the Hebrews having\nborrowed anything from the Persians, \u2018among whom they never lived.\u2019[723]\nProfessor Spiegel, by referring to an acquaintance of Abraham with\nZarathustra, has spirited the question off into the atmosphere of so\ndistant a time that it is impossible with any regard for critical\nhistory to build upon his foundation,[724] and preferable even to adopt\nVolney\u2019s forgotten theory,[725] which makes the influence of Magism on\nthe Hebrews begin with the destruction of the Northern kingdom. Others,\nby assuming an influence exerted by the Semites on the Iranians, and by\na mistaken reverence for Hebrew antiquity, have cut away the ground from\nany scientific investigation of the question.[726] It is a mistaken, and\nanything but the right sort of reverence, when we would rather leave\nunknown or misunderstood a region of literature which we all love and\nvenerate, and to which we owe most of our moral and religious ideals,\nthan trace its elements and analyse their psychological and literary\nhistory, so as to understand the object of our love. Has Homer lost his\nattractiveness since we have subjected him to critical analysis, or the\ndivine Plato forfeited any of his divinity since we have discovered some\nof the sources of his ideas? For the fact of Originality is not the only\ncriterion of the admirable. Not only that which is cast in one piece\nfrom top to toe, is one whole: an alien substance which becomes a\ncivilising agent to that in which it rests, and a patchwork which has\nturned out a harmonious whole, are not less admirable or perfect. Julius\nBraun says very justly,[727] \u2018There is another and indeed the highest\nkind of originality, which is not the beginning but the result of\nhistorical growth\u2014the originality of mature age. We have this, when an\nindividual or a nation has gathered up all existing means of culture,\nand then still possesses power to pass on beyond them and deal freely\nwith all elements received from the past.\u2019\n\nThus, then, it was quite possible for many Iranian elements to be\nreceived into the system of the literature and cosmic conceptions of the\nHebrews; and we do nothing towards saving the honour of the Hebrew\nnationality by using force to make the Iranians pupils of the Hebrews.\nKarl Twesten saw the truth as to their mutual relation; and I quote his\nwords, to show the impression made by the coincidences of Iranian and\nHebrew antiquity on a sober-minded historian who considers the question\nfree from any previous pledges to either side. \u2018It cannot be pleaded\nthat the Iranians may have borrowed from the Hebrews or drawn from the\nsame source. For, on the one hand, these things are there an essential\npart of a system, whereas the Pentateuch makes no further use of them;\nand, on the other, they existed in times and places where, even if the\npossibility of a very early formation of these stories be conceded, the\nHebrew theology could not possibly have any influence. The Israelites\nwere so little known, and so rarely in contact with other nations, and\nthe priesthoods of antiquity so exclusive, and oriental \u00cer\u00e2n so distant,\nthat no early influence of Mosaic doctrines on the theories of the Zend\nbooks is even conceivable. But Iranian influences on the nations of\nWestern Asia are probable and inevitable, from the time when the Medes\nand Persians became the dominant powers.\u2019[728]\n\nSuch, in general terms, were the causes which yielded an increase of\nmatter to the Hebrew store of legends during the Captivity. Through the\nrevision and literary elaboration of the old legends in the period of\nthe Captivity also, many Babylonian features naturally entered into the\npicture. I may mention N\u00f6ldeke\u2019s plausible idea (in his\n_Untersuchungen_), that the years and cycles of years in the Patriarchal\nhistory point to Babylon and are connected with astronomical systems.\nThe last systematic revision of the Table of Nations (Gen. X.) may also\nbe referred to the same time and influence. The preparation of such a\nsurvey of all known nations of the earth seems to have been possible in\nthat ancient time only in an empire which through its wide-spread\ndominion had an extensive circle of view open to it in relation to\ngeography and ethnology, and would be almost impossible within the\nlimits of the kingdom of Judah. Although we have at the present day good\nreasons for treating as a mere fable the more extravagant ideas that\nwere long current, and gave rise to many lamentable prejudices, of the\nutter seclusion of the Hebrews in Canaan, yet their view can hardly have\nreached to such a distance, and, if it did, cannot have taken in such\nspecial points, as are met with in the Table of Nations. But we should\nexaggerate the possible influence of the connexion with the Phenicians,\nif with Tuch[729] we were to derive from it the ethnographical\ninformation requisite to produce that Table. And we should be applying\nthe measure of modern expeditions to David\u2019s and Solomon\u2019s navigation\u2014to\nwhich Mauch attributes a colonisation of Africa by Jews in connexion\nwith the discovery of Ophir\u2014if we were to suppose that navigation to\nhave yielded this same geographical and ethnographical knowledge as its\nscientific result.\n\nThe attention of the Hebrews could not be directed to ethnographical\nproblems on so large a scale before their residence among the confusion\nof nationalities in the empire of Babylon and Assyria. That period is\nalso the first at which interest could be felt in another\nproblem\u2014Biblical answer to which is avowedly given at Babylon. I mean\nthe story of the Confusion of Tongues at Babel (Babylon) in Genesis XI.\n4\u20139.\n\nIt is not difficult to understand that the Hebrews, who in Canaan, a\ncountry of such linguistic uniformity, had no occasion to pay attention\nto the fact of the variety of tongues, on entering the Babylonian empire\nwith its varying languages were naturally led to ask the question to\nwhich the eleventh chapter of Genesis offers a reply. Why, even earlier\nthan this the Northern empire was a nation whose tongue they did not\nunderstand (Deut. XXVIII. 49),[730] \u2018a nation from afar, an ancient\nnation, a nation from of old, a nation whose language thou knowest not,\nneither understandest what they say\u2019 (Jer. V. 15). Whilst even in\nHesiod\u2019s time men were already called by the Greeks \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2 \u2018speaking\nvariously\u2019 (_Works and Days_, 109, 142), to the ancient Hebrew \u2018the\nwhole earth was of one language and of one speech.\u2019 Now, as the impulse\nto ask this question arose in Babylon, the place where such a problem\nmust force itself most irresistibly on the attention, so Babylon was\nfound to be also the scene of the solution of the problem. It is so\nnatural to place the origin of an event or a phenomenon at the place\nwhere it has first occurred to us or we have first perceived it. But, in\nfact, we find the story of the building of the Tower taking its place\namong the latest Cuneiform discoveries.[731] That the origin of the\nTable of Nations hangs together with the story of the origin of the\ndiversity of languages is evident, not only from the inner connexion\nbetween the respective problems, but also from the fact that the Table\nof Nations always distinguishes the various races \u2018after their families,\n_after their tongues_, in their countries, in their nations\u2019 (Gen. X. 5,\n20, 31).\n\nThe attempted etymology of B\u00e2bhel from b\u00e2lal \u2018to mix,\u2019 which is tacked\non to the story, is quite secondary; it is impossible to approve the\nnotion that this etymology was itself the cause of the invention of the\nstory that languages had their origin at Babylon. On the contrary, the\nessential part of the story is the origin at Babylon; the etymology is a\nsecondary point, by which it was attempted to leave no part unexplained.\nPeople in antiquity, and even in modern times those who are more\naffected by a word than a thought, were fond of finding in the word a\nsort of reflexion of the corresponding thing. Indeed, many component\nparts of ancient stories owe their existence only to such false\netymologies. Dido\u2019s ox-hides and their connexion with the founding of\nCarthage are only based on the Greek _byrsa_, a misunderstood modified\npronunciation of the Semitic _b\u00eereth\u00e2_ \u2018fortress, citadel.\u2019 The shining\nApollo, born of light, is said to be born in Delos or Lycia, because the\nterms Apollon _D\u00ealios_ and _Lyk\u00eagen\u00eas_ were not understood. The\nPhenician origin of the Irish, asserted in clerical chronicles of the\nmiddle ages, only rests on a false derivation of the Irish word _fena_,\npl. _fion_, \u2018beautiful, agreeable.\u2019 Even the savage tribes of America\nare misled by a false etymology to call the Michabo, the Kadmos of the\nRed Indians (from _michi_ \u2018great\u2019 and _wabos_ \u2018white\u2019), a White\nHare.[732] Falsely interpreted names of towns most frequently cause the\ninvention of fables. How fanciful the operation of popular etymology is\nin the case of local names is observable in many such names when\ntranslated into another language. By the lake of Gennesereth lies\nHippos, the district surrounding which was called Hippene. This word in\nPhenician denoted a harbour, and is found not only in Carthaginian\nterritory as the name of the See of St. Jerome, but also as the name of\nplaces in Spain. The Hebrew ch\u00f4ph \u2018shore,\u2019 and the local names Y\u00e2ph\u00f4\n(Jaffa) and \u1e24aif\u00e2, are unquestionably related to it. But the Greeks\nregarded it from a Grecian point of view, and thought it meant\nHorse-town. Did not they call ships sea-horses, and attribute horses to\nthe Sea-god? Then, the Arabs directly translated this \u1f35\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 Hippos into\n\u1e33al\u02bfat al-\u1e24u\u1e63\u00e2n: \u1e25u\u1e63\u00e2n being _horse_ in modern Arabic.[733] The Persian\ntown Rey was made the subject of a fable, which I mention here partly\nbecause it exhibits some similarity with the subject of the \u2018Tower of\nBabel.\u2019 The Persian chroniclers relate,[734] that the old king Keyk\u00e2v\u00fbs\nhad a chariot constructed, by which, after various preparations, he\nintended to ascend to heaven. But God commanded the wind to carry the\nking into the clouds. Arrived there, he was dashed down again, and fell\ninto the sea of Gurg\u00e2n. Keychosrau, son of Sh\u00e2wush, coming to that\ncoast, employed the same chariot to convey him to Babylon. When he came\nto the locality of the modern Rey, people said, bireyy \u00e2med Keychosrau,\n\u2018on a chariot came Keychosrau.\u2019 He caused a city to be built at this\nplace, which was called Rey, because a chariot is so called in\nPersian.[735]\n\nGranting all this, it is generally only accessory features added to the\nmain stem of the story that owe their origin to a mistaken attempt at\netymologising. The existence and first origin of an entire story can\nscarcely be produced by an unsatisfactory etymology. With regard to the\nHebrew stories, in which etymologising plays a considerable part, the\nsame rule is, generally speaking, to be observed. There also the story\nis enriched in details by etymological attempts suggested later. But it\nis not brought into life in the first instance by this factor. On the\ncontrary, as a connexion must be discovered between the name and the\ncircumstances of its bearer, and the original mythical relation between\nthem has been long lost to memory, features quite foreign to the name\nitself, but characteristic of the story, are sometimes brought into\netymological connexion with the name and fitted on to the story. From\nthis source emanates the striking insufficiency of many of these\netymological explanations, _e.g._ of the interpretation of Abhr\u00e2h\u00e2m by\nAbh h\u00e2m\u00f4n \u2018Father of a multitude,\u2019 and N\u00f4ach (Noah) by nicham \u2018to\ncomfort.\u2019 In the Hebrew Myth of Civilisation, Noah is the most prominent\nfounder of agriculture and inventor of agricultural implements;\nconsequently it is he that procures comfort for men against the curse\nimposed on the soil. This feature is not etymologically expressed in the\nname Noah; but the later formation of the story about him invented a\nfalse etymology, in order to connect it with the name. The case is the\nsame with the story of the Languages, in which B\u00e2bhel is derived from\nb\u00e2lal \u2018to mix.\u2019 The etymology relates quite as frequently to a very\nsubordinate feature in the story, as for instance in the interpretation\nof most of the names of Jacob\u2019s sons in Gen. XXIX, XXX, or in the\nderivation of the name \u1e32ayin (Cain) from \u1e33\u00e2n\u00e2 \u2018to gain.\u2019 Sometimes,\nlastly, the etymon is given correctly, while its original relation to\nthe person bearing the name is lost with the loss of the mythical\nconsciousness. In such cases there frequently arises a new feature of\nthe story. Thus, for instance, it is quite correctly affirmed that\nYi\u1e63ch\u00e2\u1e33 (Isaac) comes from \u1e63\u00e2cha\u1e33 \u2018to laugh:\u2019 but it is no longer\nunderstood that the word designates the \u2018Laughing one\u2019 (the Sun), and so\nthe laughter of the aged mother to whom the birth of a son is announced\nbeforehand, or the laughter of other people on hearing the announcement,\nis introduced. In the etymology of the name Ya\u02bfa\u1e33\u00f4bh (Jacob) both the\netymon and that to which it refers (\u02bf\u00e2\u1e33\u00eabh \u2018heel\u2019) are correctly\npreserved, not however without the introduction of a foreign\netymological element (\u02bfi\u1e33\u1e33\u00eabh \u2018to cheat\u2019), which became prominent in the\nsubsequent development of the story. The same phenomenon also appears on\nthe domain of the Arabian stories, a region of Semitism which has still\nto be explored for mythological questions. I have no doubt that the\ngenealogical tables of the Arabs contain names which will be discovered\nby sound etymology to be Solar designations. This seems to me, for\nexample, to be the case with H\u00e2shim. The story that he and his\ntwin-brother \u02bfAbd Shams were born with their foreheads joined together,\nor with the forehead of one joined to the hand of the other,[736]\nresembles the myths of the birth of Jacob and Esau, and of that of Perez\nand Zerah.[737] It was worked out with an object during the later\ndynastic rivalry between the H\u00e2shimites and Ummayads (descendants of\n\u02bfAbd Shams). But H\u00e2shim is \u2018the Breaker,\u2019 thus answering perfectly to\nPere\u1e63 (Perez) or Gide\u02bf\u00f4n. When the mythical consciousness was lost, a\nstory bearing an obviously apocryphal character was fabricated to give\nit an etymology. It is this. On occasion of a famine resulting from a\nbad harvest, H\u00e2shim went to Syria, where he had a quantity of bread\nbaked. This he put into large sacks, loaded his camels with it, and took\nit to Mekka. There _hashama_, _i.e._ he broke up the bread into bits,\nsent for butchers, and distributed it among the people of Mekka.\nTherefore, it is said, he was called H\u00e2shim, \u2018the Breaker.\u2019[738] We have\nhere the very same process in the history of etymology which we had\noccasion to observe in the etymological explanation of Biblical names.\nThus, as is obvious in the above-quoted Hebrew examples, it must be\nadmitted that the later etymological conception frequently forced itself\ninto the foreground so much as to obtain recognition as a portion of the\nnarrative.[739] But no entire story, such as that of the Confusion of\nTongues at Babel, can be proved to have been formed upon no other basis\nthan an indifferent etymology. So we may with confidence hold to the\nabove-suggested occasion for the origin of this story of the variety of\nlanguages. There is good ground for hoping that before very long the\nrecently discovered mythical texts of the Assyrian and Babylonian\nliterature will pour an increasing flood of light on the question\ndiscussed in this chapter. The richness of the stores contained in the\ntwo latest works of the meritorious scholar George Smith\u2014\u2018Assyrian\nDiscoveries: an account of exploration and discoveries\u2019 (1876), and \u2018The\nChaldean Account of Genesis\u2019 (1876)\u2014allow us to entertain the best hopes\nof this result. It is greatly to be desired that an unprejudiced\nconception of the matter of Hebrew mythic stories may be promoted by\nthese discoveries. But to attain to the result of true freedom from old\nerrors, it is essential to put away all fears, and to be guided solely\nand simply by the interests of the Holiest of Holies, namely, scientific\ntruth, in forming a judgment on the priority or simultaneous origin of\nsuch stories in different nations.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 713:\n\n See Supplement to the Augsburg _Allgemeine Zeitung_ of June 19, 1874.\n\nFootnote 714:\n\n I will here cite a passage of Ibn Chald\u00fbn, although not decisive on\n questions like the present: \u2018Know that the Persians and Indians know\n nothing of the \u1e6c\u00fbf\u00e2n (deluge); some Persians say that it took place\n only at Babylon.\u2019 (History, vol. II.) Edward Thomas, in the _Academy_,\n 1875, p. 401, quotes a passage of al-B\u00eer\u00fbn\u00ee, in which it is said that\n the Indians, Chinese and Persians have no story of a Deluge, but that\n some say that the Persians know of a partial deluge. Burnouf believed\n the idea of a Deluge to be originally foreign to Indian mythology, and\n to have been borrowed, probably from Chaldaic sources (_Bh\u00e2gavata\n Pur\u00e2\u1e47a_, III. XXXI., LI.). A. Weber (in the _Indische Studien_, Heft\n 2, and on occasion of a critique of N\u00eave\u2019s writings on the Indian\n story of the Deluge, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1851, V. 526)\n declares himself in favour of the indigenousness of the Indian story,\n in opposition to Lassen and Roth, who agree with Burnouf.\n\nFootnote 715:\n\n The similarities and differences of the respective stories of the\n Deluge are lucidly placed side by side by George Smith in _The\n Chaldean Account of Genesis_, p. 286 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 716:\n\n Tuch, _Commentar \u00fcber die Genesis_, 1st ed. 1838, p. 149; 2nd ed.\n 1871, p. 47.\n\nFootnote 717:\n\n _Academy_, 1873, no. 77. col. 292.\n\nFootnote 718:\n\n See _Westminster Review_, April 1875, p. 486.\n\nFootnote 719:\n\n _Geschichte des Alterthums_, 4th ed. 1874, I. 186.\n\nFootnote 720:\n\n _The Chaldean Account of Genesis_, pp. 60\u2013112.\n\nFootnote 721:\n\n Consult also Dr. Jacob Auerbach\u2019s article _Ueber den ersten Vers der\n Genesis_ in Geiger\u2019s _Zeitsch. f\u00fcr Wissenschaft und Leben_, 1863, Bd.\n II. p. 253, who, I now see, comes very near to these ideas, but does\n not express them fully or clearly.\n\nFootnote 722:\n\n This view is expounded by Kuenen in his _Religion of Israel_, II. 156.\n\nFootnote 723:\n\n This appears to be Bunsen\u2019s opinion: _God in History_, I. 101.\n\nFootnote 724:\n\n See Max M\u00fcller\u2019s essay _Genesis and the Zend-Avesta_ (_Chips_, I. 143\n _et seqq._). The Dutch scholar Tiele occupies nearly the same position\n as Spiegel on this question, which he discusses fully in his book _De\n Godsdienst van Zarathustra_, Haarlem 1864, p. 302 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 725:\n\n _Les Ruines_, XX. 13. System.\n\nFootnote 726:\n\n I must mention a third view on the concurrence of the Hebrew with the\n Aryan story of the primeval age; it is that which was first declared\n by Ewald in his _History of Israel_, I. 224 _et seqq._, and is adopted\n by Lassen and Weber among the Germans, and by Burnouf and (with some\n hesitation) Renan among the French. In this view the coincidences in\n the respective primitive stories are to be accounted for by common\n prehistoric traditions which the Aryans and the Semites formed in\n their original common dwelling-place concerning primeval history.\n Renan speaks shortly on the subject in his _Histoire g\u00e9n. des Langues\n s\u00e9mitiques_, pp. 480 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 727:\n\n _Naturgeschichte der Sage_, I. 8.\n\nFootnote 728:\n\n _Die religi\u00f6sen, politischen und socialen Ideen der Asiatischen\n Culturv\u00f6lker, etc._, edited by M. Lazarus, Berlin 1872, p. 590.\n\nFootnote 729:\n\n _Commentar zur Genesis_, 1st ed. 1838, p. 200; 2nd ed. 1871, p. 157.\n\nFootnote 730:\n\n It should be observed that in the postexilian imitation of this sermon\n of castigations (now called in the Synagogue t\u00f4kh\u00e2ch\u00e2) in Lev. XXVI.\n 14\u201343, the circumstance that the people would be carried off by an\n enemy \u2018whose language they understood not\u2019 is omitted. Other points in\n the t\u00f4kh\u00e2ch\u00e2 of Leviticus indicate that it was imagined by one who had\n a knowledge of the Captivity; so e.g. the especial accentuation of\n residence in the land of an enemy, as in vv. 32, 36, 38, 39.\n\nFootnote 731:\n\n George Smith, _The Chaldean Account of Genesis_, pp. 158 _et seqq._\n\nFootnote 732:\n\n Fiske, _Myths and Myth makers_, pp. 71, 154. See Tylor, _Primitive\n Culture_, I. 357 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 733:\n\n From Sepp\u2019s _Jerusalem und das heilige Land_, II. 157.\n\nFootnote 734:\n\n In Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, _Geogr. Dictionary_, II. 893. The explanation of the name\n Thak\u00eef in Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, III. 498, quite reminds one of the Old Testament way\n of giving etymologies of names.\n\nFootnote 735:\n\n See some useful quotations in L. L\u00f6w\u2019s _Beitr\u00e4ge zur j\u00fcd.\n Alterthumskunde_, Szegedin 1875, II. 388; and very interesting\n references in Pott\u2019s _Wilhelm von Humboldt und die\n Sprachwissenschaft_, Berlin 1876, p. CIX. _et seq._\n\nFootnote 736:\n\n _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1853, VII. p. 28.\n\nFootnote 737:\n\n See supra, pp. 133, 183.\n\nFootnote 738:\n\n Ibn Dureyd, _Kit\u00e2b al-Isht\u00ee\u1e33\u00e2\u1e33_, ed. W\u00fcstenfeld, G\u00f6ttingen 1853, p. 9.\n\nFootnote 739:\n\n See Ewald, _History of Israel_, I. 19 _et seq._\n\n-----\n\n EXCURSUS\n\n A. (_Page 30._)\n _Agadic Etymologies._\n\nIn another direction also the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 is wont to supply the omissions of\nthe Scripture. In passages where the Bible itself gives no reason for\nthe choice or origin of a name, the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 quite independently gives its\nown etymological reason: this peculiarity occurs excessively often (e.g.\nin the etymology of the name Miriam in the Midr\u00e2sh to the Song of Songs,\nII. 12, that of the names of the two mid wives Shiphrah and Puah, who in\naddition are identified with Jochebed and Miriam, in the Talm\u00fbd Bab. tr.\nS\u00f4\u1e6d\u00e2, fol. 11. b, etc.).[740] Here I will bring forward out of a great\nnumber of instances one which affords an opportunity of exhibiting an\ninteresting coincidence between the Jewish and the Mohammedan Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, and\naffords a proof how extensive and how far-reaching into the smallest\ndetail are the loans taken by the Mohammedan from the Rabbinical\ntheologians, and on the other hand how independently and how completely\nin an Arabian spirit these borrowed treasures were worked up.\n\nIn Gen. XLVI. 21, Benjamin\u2019s sons are enumerated without any\netymological observations. The Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 supplies the deficiency, and puts\nevery one of the names of Joseph\u2019s nephews into connexion with\nBenjamin\u2019s melancholy remembrance of his lost brother. The\ninterpretations in question are contained in the Talm\u00fbd and Midr\u00e2sh; and\nthey are found in a different, but probably the most original form in\nthe Targ\u00fbm Jerus. on the passage; and it is sufficient to refer to this.\nAccording to this, Benjamin named his ten sons \u02bfal perish\u00fbth\u00e2 de-Y\u00f4s\u00eaph\nach\u00f4h\u00ee \u2018for the separation from his brother Joseph:\u2019 thus Bela\u02bf,\n\u2018because Joseph was devoured-away (i.e. _torn away_) from him,\u2019\nde-ithbela\u02bf minn\u00eah: Bekher, \u2018because Joseph was his mother\u2019s\nfirst-born,\u2019 bukhr\u00e2 de-imm\u00eah: Ashb\u00eal, \u2018from the captivity into which\nJoseph fell,\u2019 de-halakh be-shibhy\u00e2th\u00e2: G\u00ear\u00e2, \u2018because Joseph had to live\nas a stranger in a foreign land,\u2019 de-ithgar be-ar\u02bf\u00e2 nukhr\u00e2\u02be\u00e2: Na\u02bfam\u00e2n,\n\u2018because Joseph was charming and dear to him,\u2019 da-haw\u00e2 n\u00e2\u02bf\u00eem we-ya\u1e33\u1e33\u00eer:\n\u00cach\u00ee, \u2018because he was his brother (ach\u00f4h\u00ee):\u2019 R\u00f4sh, because he was the\nmost excellent in his father\u2019s house: Mupp\u00eem, because he was sold to the\nland M\u00f4ph (Egypt): Chupp\u00eem, because Benjamin had exactly reached the age\nof eighteen years, that of maturity for marriage (chupp\u00e2h) in men:[741]\nArd, from y\u00e2rad \u2018to go down,\u2019 because Joseph had to go down to Egypt.\n\nThe Arabic pendant to this Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 I found in a book Zahr al-kim\u00e2m f\u00ee\n\u1e33i\u1e63\u1e63at Y\u00fbsuf \u02bfaleyhi al-sal\u00e2m, by the learned M\u00e2likite \u02bfOmar b. Ibr\u00e2h\u00eem\nal-Aus\u00ee al-An\u1e63\u00e2r\u00ee. It is the same book as \u1e24\u00e2j\u00ee Chalf\u00e2 quotes (V. 381,\nno. 11386) by the name Maj\u00e2lis \u1e33i\u1e63\u1e63at Y\u00fbsuf,[742] although the\ncommencement given by him does not agree with the initial words of our\nCodex (No. 7 of the Supplement, in the Leipzig University Library). The\nbook is divided into seventeen maj\u00e2lis, or sessions\u2014an arrangement not\nuncommon in Arabic works of a hortatory character or touching on\nreligious knowledge. Each mejlis contains a portion of the life of\nJoseph, always introduced by a verse of the \u1e32or\u00e2n, and abundantly mixed\nwith poems and other episodes and intermezzos. It is an instructive\nsource for the legend of Joseph among the Mohammedans. It would take us\ntoo far from the subject if I were to give a full characterisation of\nthe book. I will therefore only mention that it betrays a close relation\nto the Jewish legend, and that the author generally gives frequent\noccasion for the conjecture that the Bible and the Jewish tradition were\nnot strange to him or to the sources from which he drew. But everything\nappears here curiously altered. For example, the cry of Isaac when\ndeceived, \u2018The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands\nof Esau\u2019 (Gen. XXVII. 22), is there given (fol. 5 _recto_) thus: al-lams\nlams \u02bfAysau w-al-r\u00ee\u1e25 r\u00ee\u1e25 Ya\u02bf\u1e33\u00fbb \u2018the touch is the touch of Esau, but the\nsmell is the smell of Jacob\u2019 (see Gen. XXVII. 27). The passage with\nwhich we have to do here occurs fol. 149 _recto_.\n\nThe scene is the brothers\u2019 dinner in Joseph\u2019s house. Each sits beside\nhis full brother; Benjamin alone has none, and begins to weep bitterly.\nThen Joseph approaches him, and after a long dialogue makes himself\nknown to Benjamin as his full brother, and talks with him. Afterwards\nJoseph asks him, \u2018Youth, hast thou a wife?\u2019 \u2018Yes,\u2019 replies Benjamin.\n\u2018And children?\u2019 \u2018I have three sons.\u2019 \u2018What name gavest thou to the\neldest?\u2019 \u2018\u1e0e\u00eeb (Wolf).\u2019 \u2018And why didst thou choose this name?\u2019 \u2018Because\nmy brothers were of opinion that a wolf had devoured my brother, and I\nwished to have a memento of the catastrophe.\u2019 \u2018And what didst thou call\nthe second?\u2019 \u2018I named him Dam (Blood).\u2019 \u2018And wherefore?\u2019 \u2018Because my\nbrothers brought a coat dipped in blood, and I wished to preserve the\nmemory of it.\u2019 \u2018And what is thy third son\u2019s name?\u2019 \u2018Y\u00fbsuf, that my\nbrother\u2019s name may not be forgotten.\u2019\n\nBut even names whose etymology occurs in the Bible itself are provided\nby the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 with new etymological explanations: so e.g. Yi\u1e63ch\u00e2\u1e33, is\nexplained by y\u00e2\u1e63\u00e2 or y\u00ea\u1e63\u00ea ch\u00f4\u1e33 \u2018A statute has gone or will go\nforth.\u2019[743]\n\n B. (Page 34.)\n _A Hermeneutical Law of the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2._\n\nThe hermeneutic principle to which we have referred in the text,\nalthough not so well known to the Agadists as it was in other circles\n(for they have nowhere expressly declared it), is to be traced\nthroughout their whole conception of Scripture. It is the principle that\n_the intensity of the sense of a word increases with the enlargement of\nits from_. This law was also set up by the Greek etymologists, and\napplied even to the point of pedantry by one of the oldest grammarians,\nTryphon.[744] With the Arabic grammarians it controls the entire\ngrammatical field: ziy\u00e2det al-laf\u1e93 (al-bin\u00e2) tadullu \u02bfala ziy\u00e2det\nal-ma\u02bfna \u2018the increase of the word (the form) points to increase of the\nmeaning.\u2019 In Agadic exegesis also it is often accepted as a valid rule\nof Scriptural interpretation. In the case of reduplicated forms\nespecially, the reduplicated indicates a fuller concept than the\nunreduplicated: e.g. l\u00eabh\u00e2bh compared with l\u00eabh (both denoting \u2018heart\u2019)\nis treated as signifying a \u2018double heart,\u2019 comprising the good and the\nevil impulse (y\u00ea\u1e63er \u1e6d\u00f4bh and y\u00ea\u1e63er h\u00e2ra\u02bf: Sifr\u00ea on Deuter. VI. 5. \u00a7 32).\nSo also in sheph\u00eeph\u00f4n compared with sheph\u00ee, the doubled _ph_ is supposed\nto point to an enlargement of the signification.\n\nBut this word sheph\u00eeph\u00f4n contains besides the reduplication of a radical\nletter an affix _\u00f4n_. This affix is also generally brought into\nconnexion with an enlargement of the signification, exactly as is done\nby the interpreters of the \u1e32or\u00e2n with the corresponding Arabic affix\n_\u00e2n_.[745] An example from the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 is as follows: in Ber\u00eash\u00eeth rabb\u00e2,\nsect. 97, Y\u00f4s\u00ea b. Chalapht\u00e2 says, 'The labours of bread-winning are\ndouble as laborious as the labours of child-birth, for of these it is\nsaid \"With pain (be\u02bfe\u1e63ebh) thou shalt bear children\" (Gen. III. 16),\nwhile of those it is said, \"With painfulness (be\u02bfi\u1e63\u1e63\u00e2bh\u00f4n) thou shalt\nenjoy it [its fruits] all the days of thy life\"' (_ib._ v. 17). Hence\nthe _\u00f4n_ affixed to \u02bfe\u1e63eb is taken to indicate a doubling of the pain;\njust as the _\u00f4n_ added to sheph\u00ee in sheph\u00eeph\u00f4n denoted lameness in both\nfeet.\n\n C. (_Page 100_.)\n _Pools and Whips of the Sun._\n\nThere is no doubt that the ancient idea which associates Pools with the\nrising and the setting sun was based on the conception that the rising\nsun emerged from water and the setting sun sank into water. In later\ntimes, when the original mythical circumstances had lost their\nclearness, the conception of the Sun\u2019s Pools underwent a considerable\nmodification. On this subject we must notice two different conceptions,\nboth of which sound quite mythical, which are preserved in the Jewish\nand Arabic tradition. One of these supposed that the Sun exhibited such\nan eagerness for the performance of his work, that the whole world would\nbe set on fire if its consequences were not moderated by various means\nfor cooling down the heat; and these means are the Pools of the Sun. In\nthe Midr\u00e2sh on Ecclesiastes, I. 6, it is said: \u2018It is reported in the\nname of Rabbi N\u00e2th\u00e2n that the ball of the Sun is fixed in a reservoir\nwith a pool of water before him; when he is about to go forth he is full\nof fire, and God weakens his force by that water, that he may not burn\nup the whole world.\u2019 A similar account is found in the Sh\u00f4ch\u00ear \u1e6d\u00f4bh on\nPs. XIX. 8, and in the same Midr\u00e2sh on v. 8 the Talmudic theory of the\n_upper waters_ (may\u00eem h\u00e2-\u02bfely\u00f4n\u00eem, which are said to be above the\nheaven) is brought into connexion with this idea. Another conception is\ndiametrically opposite to this. According to this view, the Sun at first\nresists the performance of his business, and is only moved to do it by\nforce and violent measures. In the Midr\u00e2sh \u00cakh\u00e2 rabb\u00e2, Introduction, \u00a7\n25, the Sun himself complains that he will not go out till he has been\nstruck with sixty whips, and received the command \u2018Go out, and let thy\nlight shine.\u2019 Among the Arabs the poet Umayy\u00e2 b. Ab\u00ee-\u1e63-\u1e62alt discourses\nat length on the compulsion which must be exerted on the Sun before he\nis willing to bestow the benefit of his light and warmth on mortals:\n\n W-ash-shamsu ta\u1e6dla\u02bfu kulla \u00e2chiri leylatin * \u1e25amr\u00e2\u02bea ma\u1e6dla\u02bfu launih\u00e2\n mutawarridu.\n Ta\u02beba fal\u00e2 tabd\u00fb lan\u00e2 f\u00ee raslih\u00e2 * ill\u00e2 mu\u02bfa\u1e0f\u1e0fabatan wa-ill\u00e2\n tujladu.\n \u2018The Sun rises at the close of every night * commencing red in colour,\n slowly advancing.\n He refuses, and appears not to us during his delay * until he is\n chastised, until he is whipped.\u2019[746]\n\nAccording to the tradition of \u02bfIkrim\u00e2 seven thousand angels are daily\noccupied with keeping the Sun in order.[747] The first conception also\nis represented in Mohammedan tradition. A sentence of tradition quoted\nby al-Suy\u00fb\u1e6d\u00ee (Tashn\u00eef al-sam\u02bf bi-ta\u02bfd\u00eed al-sab\u02bf)[748] says that the Sun\nis pelted every day with snow and ice by seven angels, that his heat may\nnot destroy the earth. This mode of cooling is the Mohammedan equivalent\nfor the Pool of the Sun. Mohammedan tradition speaks, moreover, also of\na Pool of the Moon.[749]\n\n D. (_Page 100._)\n _Solar Myth and Animal-Worship._\n\nThe Egyptian animal-worship, indeed animal-worship in general, can only\nbe traced back to mythical conceptions, which, when the myth passed into\ntheology and the true understanding of it became rare and then ceased\naltogether, gained a new meaning quite different from the original.\nAnimal-worship is accordingly one of the sources for the discovery of\nmythological facts. This is especially the case with the Egyptian\nanimal-worship, which, as Plutarch (_De Iside et Osiride_, c. VIII.)\nsays of the religion of the Egyptians, is founded _par excellence_ on\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae, since the same impulse which is reflected in the\nfigurative portion of the Hieroglyphic system of writing led the\nEgyptians to employ animals in mythology with equal profuseness. Thus,\ne.g. the often discussed Cat-worship of the Egyptians is traced back to\none point of their Solar myth. The old Egyptian myth unquestionably\ncalled the Sun the Cat; of which a clear trace is left in the XVIIth\nchapter of the Book of the Dead.[750] Like the Sun, says Horapollo, the\npupil of the cat\u2019s eye grows larger with the advance of day, till at\nnoon it is quite round; after which it gradually decreases again. The\nEgyptian myth imagined a great cat behind the Sun, which is the pupil of\nthe cat\u2019s eye. In the later Edda (I. 96, Gylf. 24) also Freya is said to\ndrive out with two cats to draw her car. In the above-quoted chapter of\nthe Book of the Dead, which Brugsch, who cites the passage of Horapollo,\nanalyses in an interesting essay,[751] it is frequently said that the\ncat is frightened by a scorpion which approaches on the vault of heaven,\nintending to block the way of the cat and cover its body with dirt.\nBrugsch identifies the scorpion with _Sin_; but to me it seems more\nprobable that we have here an echo of the old myth of the Cat, i.e. a\nSolar myth, in which the Sun does battle against the Dragon or\nserpentine monster that obscures or devours him. Instead of the mythical\nexpression, that Darkness covers up the Sun, it is said here that \u2018The\nDragon of storms or night covers the Cat\u2019s body with dirt.\u2019\n\nI mention here this important argument affecting the origin of\nanimal-worship, not on account of the Cat, but in order to point to an\nelement of the Egyptian animal-worship which hangs together with the\nmythical mode of regarding the Sun which has been more fully worked out\nin the text\u2014that he sinks into the water in the evening, so as to come\nto land again in the morning. It is well known that in many parts of\nEgypt the Crocodile enjoyed divine honours. Now this worship appears to\nbe connected with the fact that in the above respect the Crocodile is,\nso to speak, a mythological hieroglyph of the Sun, and doubtless figured\nin the Solar myth as a designation of the Sun. The Crocodile passes the\ngreater part of the day on the dry land, and the night in the water.\nHerodotus (II. 68) says, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03be\u03b7\u03c1\u1ff7, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n\u03b4\u1f72 \u03bd\u03cd\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u1ff7. Plutarch shows admirable tact, especially\nin his sober intelligence in relation to the mythical use made of living\ncreatures that abide in the water or grow up out of it, and consequently\nunderstands the relation of the Lotus-flower to the Sun in this sense:\n\u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03be \u1f51\u03b3\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b1\u03c8\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 (_De Iside et Osiride_, c. XI.). Yet in treating of the\nCrocodile he strangely heaps hypothesis upon hypothesis (_ibid._ c.\nLXXV.), and exhibits superior insight only in so far as he endeavours to\nfind in the nature of the Crocodile the origin of the worship paid to\nit, whereas Diodorus is satisfied with the utilitarian explanation that\nthe Crocodile keeps robbers at a distance from the Nile (I. 89). But on\nthis point he does not, as on many others, hit the nail on the head.\n\nThe reverse of the Crocodile-worship is that of the Ichneumon in the\ncountry now called Fay\u00fbm. According to the classical reporters, this\nanimal was sacred to Buto, who was identified with the Leto of the\nGreeks. Now Max M\u00fcller (_Chips etc._ II. p. 80) has convincingly proved\nLeto or Latona to be one of the names of the Night. The Ichneumon,\naccordingly, is likewise a mythical designation of the Night in its\nrelation to the Sun (Cat, Crocodile); for the special characteristic of\nthe Ichneumon, with which the worship paid to it is connected, is its\npeculiar hostility to cats and crocodiles.\n\nThe part played by the Cow also in animal-worship must be traced back to\nthe Solar myth as its primary origin. It is well known that one of the\nvery commonest appellations of the Sun in mythology is this\u2014the Cow. The\nSun\u2019s rays are described as the Cow\u2019s milk; especially in the Vedas this\nis one of the most familiar conceptions. The worship of the Scarabeus\namong the Egyptians must also be based on a close connexion with the\nSolar myth, although the point of attachment to that mythological group\nis not obvious in this case to us, who are so far removed from the\nmythical mind. However, even Plutarch[752] endeavours to discover some\npoint of similarity which might serve as _tertium comparationis_, and\nfinds it in the Scarabeus\u2019 mode of generation.\n\nThe animal-worship was not based upon any experience of the usefulness\nor hurtfulness of the animals, but always stands in close connexion with\nthe Solar myth, of which it is only a theological and liturgical\ndevelopment. This is most conspicuously evident from the fact that,\nbesides real existing animals, there were also imaginary ones that\nreceived divine honours, and played a very prominent part, as, for\nexample, the Phenix. But this word also is only an ancient mythical\ndesignation of the Sun. The Phenix is \u2018a winged animal with red and\ngolden feathers;\u2019[753] a description of the Sun from the mythical point\nof view, as must be sufficiently obvious from what was expounded on p.\n116. The Phenix comes every five hundred years\u2014at the end of each great\nSolar period. When the myth-creating stage had been overpassed, and the\nname Phenix disappeared from the inventory of names of the Sun, the\nword, surviving the myth itself, and the remains of a misunderstood\nmythical conception attached to the word, might produce the superstition\nof the real existence of the bird Phenix. And it is these very remains\nthat permit and render possible the reconstruction of the mythical\nsignificance.[754] Even religious usages may have their source in the\nancient mythical circle of ideas. From Herodotus we learn that the\nEgyptians were forbidden to sacrifice or eat the Cow, but that the Ox\nwas not so protected.[755] This is closely connected with mythical\nideas. To the Cow, whose milk and horns are the mythical representatives\nof the rays, whether of the Sun or of the Moon, extensive divine\nveneration could more naturally be paid than to the Ox, who less\nperfectly exhibits what the myth tells of the Sun, inasmuch as he has\nnot the milk; and the veneration would naturally carry with it the idea,\nthat it was forbidden either to kill or to eat of the sacred animal.\n\n E. (_Page 109._)\n _The Sun as a Well._\n\nTo the mythical conception discussed in the text, which regards the Sun\nas an Eye, must be added another parallel view, that of the Sun as a\n_Well_. Language and myth here show remarkable uniformity, which helps\nthe identification. Many languages have the same name for Well and Eye,\nas if they followed the mathematical law that when two things are each\nequal to a third, they are equal to each other. So it is in Semitic\n(\u02bfayin, \u02bfayn, etc.); in Persian tsheshm and tsheshmeh; in Chinese ian,\nwhich word denotes both _well_ and _eye_. The thirty-four wells near\nBunarbashi, which was formerly believed to be the site of the Homeric\nIlion, are called by the people, using a round number, \u2018the forty\n_eyes_.\u2019 For the Sun is not only a seeing eye, but also a flowing well.\nIt is possible that the _weeping eye_, which is actually a flowing well\n(see Jer. VIII. 23 [IX. 1] we-\u02bf\u00eanay me\u1e33\u00f4r dim\u02bf\u00e2 \u2018would that my eyes were\na fountain of tears\u2019), may serve to mediate between the two senses.\nHeinrich Heine, in his \u2018Nordsee-cyclus\u2019 (\u2018_Nachts in der Kaj\u00fcte_\u2019) says:\n\n From those heavenly eyes above me,\n Light and trembling sparks are falling...\n O ye heavenly eyes above me!\n Weep yourselves into my spirit,\n That my spirit may run over\n With those tears so sweet and starry.[756]\n\nFreya, an acknowledged solar figure, whose car is drawn by cats, weeps\n_golden tears_ for her lost husband.[757] Here the tears of the Sun\u2019s\neye are his golden rays.\n\nThe Sun being a Well, the light of his rays is the moisture that flows\nfrom the well. In the Egyptian Book of the Dead the Sun is called r\u00e2 pu\nnum \u00e2tef nuteru \u2018the Sun, _the primitive water_, the father of the\ngods.\u2019[758] Lucretius (_De Rerum Natura_, V. 282) calls the Sun\n\n Largus item _liquidi_ fons _luminis_, aetherius, Sol,\n _Inrigat_ assidue coelum candore recenti,\n\n\u2018who fructifies the heaven with ever-new brilliancy.\u2019 The same view\nprevails also on Semitic ground. In Hebrew and Arabic the root n\u00e2har\ndenotes equally \u2018to flow\u2019 and \u2018to shine.\u2019 N\u00e2h\u00e2r (Heb.), nahar (Ar.), is\n\u2018a river,\u2019 nah\u00e2r (Ar.) \u2018the brightness of the sun by day.\u2019 In\n\u02bfAbd-al-Ra\u1e25m\u00e2n al-Asad\u00ee\u2019s poem in defence of the tribe of Asad against a\nsatire of Ibn Mayy\u00e2d\u00e2 of the tribe of Murr, the setting of the Sun is\ncalled in\u1e63ib\u00e2buh\u00e2[759] \u2018his pouring himself out,\u2019 his condition when he\nhas poured forth all his rays:\n\n If the Sun\u2019s rays belonged to one tribe, * then his shining-forth and\n his concealment would belong to us;\n But he belongs to God, who holds command over him; * to His power belong\n both his rising and his effusion of himself.\n\n Walau anna \u1e33arna-sh-shamsi k\u00e2na li-ma\u02bfsharin * lak\u00e2na lan\u00e2 ishr\u00e2\u1e33uh\u00e2\n wa\u02be\u1e25tij\u00e2buh\u00e2;\n Wal\u00e2kinnah\u00e2 lill\u00e2hi yamliku amrah\u00e2 * li-\u1e33udratihi i\u1e63\u02bfaduh\u00e2 wan\u1e63ib\u00e2buh\u00e2.\n\nThe poet \u1e6caraf\u00e2, to express the idea that the Sun _lends_ or _spends_\nhis rays, uses the verb to \u2018give to drink\u2019 (sa\u1e33at-hu iy\u00e2t ush-shamsi,\nMu\u02bfalla\u1e33\u00e2, v. 9.), and the same idiom is used of the light of the stars.\nThe word kaukab, which in Semitic generally denotes _star_, also\nsignifies a well-spring, e.g. \u2018and may no well-spring (kaukab) irrigate\nthe pasture\u2019 (_A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, XI. 126. 15). Compare a passage in the\nintroduction to the Commentary on the \u1e32or\u00e2n called al-Kashsh\u00e2f by\nZamachshar\u00ee (de Sacy, _Anthologie gramm. ar._ p. 120. 8, text), where\nthe two significations of the word occur close together. To this place\nbelongs also a sentence delivered by Rabbi Ami in the Babylonian Talm\u00fbd,\nTa\u02bfan\u00eeth, fol. 7 b. He explains the words al-kappay\u00eem kiss\u00e2\u00f4r in Job\nXXXVI. 32, thus: \u2018On account of the sin of their hands he (God) holds\nback the rain,\u2019 as by \u2018light\u2019 rain must be meant (\u00ean \u00f4r ell\u00e2 m\u00e2\u1e6d\u00e2r), and\ngives the same interpretation of the word \u00f4r \u2018light\u2019 in another passage,\nJob XXXVII. 11, \u2018he also loads the cloud with moisture, _spreads abroad\nthe cloud of his rain_\u2019 (y\u00e2ph\u00ee\u1e63 \u02bfanan \u00f4r\u00f4). But of what fluid the rays\nof the heavenly bodies are composed is not fixed and determined by the\nmyth. In the Vendidad, XXI. 26, 32, 34, \u2018the Sun, moon, and stars are\nrich in _Milk_.\u2019 No less frequent is the idea that the heavenly bodies\n_make water_.[760] This latter view of the Sun\u2019s rays as a liquid is\nremarkably reflected in the Hungarian language; and I will therefore\nnote some facts relating to the subject, which will be interesting to\nthe investigators of Comparative Mythology. It is especially noteworthy\nthat in old Hungarian the word hugy, which in the modern language means\nonly \u2018urine,\u2019 was employed for \u2018star.\u2019 In the Legend of St. Francis, an\nancient document of the Hungarian language, the Latin _stellarum cursus_\nis translated _hugoknak foly\u00e1sa_ 'the flowing of the _hugyok_.' To the\nsame root belong probably some proper names also, collected by Rev. Aron\nSzil\u00e1dy (_Magyar Nyelv\u0151r_, I. 223), e.g. Hugdi, Hugod, Hugus (which\nshould be read Hugydi, Hugyad, Hugyos), which must surely signify\n\u2018shining,\u2019 _f\u00e9nyes_. The same view of light as a fluid is also preserved\nin the later language, in which with sug\u00e1r \u2018ray\u2019 the verb \u00f6mlik \u2018to pour\nitself out\u2019 is employed, as in many other languages.\n\n F. (_Page 113._)\n _Cain in Arabic._\n\nThe names of the first brothers in the Biblical legend of the\nMohammedans are H\u00e2bil and \u1e32\u00e2bil. Even D\u2019Herbelot (_Biblioth\u00e8que\nOrientale_, S.V. Cabil) explains: \u1e32\u00e2bil, \u2018Receiver,\u2019 as an Arabic\ndiversion of the etymon with which the Hebrew text supplies the name,\nviz. k\u00e2n\u00eeth\u00ee, \u2018I have gained or received a man for Jahveh.\u2019 Still we\nmust doubt whether the name \u1e32\u00e2bil has any etymological foot-hold in this\ngroup. Nor can it, as Chwolson supposes, be traced to a transcriber\u2019s\nerror which had been propagated so as to become fixed.[761] It is\nfounded on a peculiar fancy of the Arabs for putting together pairs of\nnames. This process may be observed to take place in one of two modes.\nFirst, the Arabs are fond of employing in groups of names various\nderivatives of the same root: e.g. they call the two angels of the grave\nMunkar and Nekir; the two armies in the story of Alexander Munsik and\nN\u00e2sik, a sort of Y\u00e2j\u00fbj and M\u00e2j\u00fbj;[762] and in the story of Joseph the\ntwo Midianites who lifted Joseph out of the pit are Bashsh\u00e2r and\nBushr\u00e2.[763] To the same category belong Shidd\u00eed and Shadd\u00e2d, the two\nsons of \u02bf\u00c2d; M\u00e2lik and Milk\u00e2n, the sons of Kin\u00e2n\u00e2.[764] This fancy\npassed from legend into actual life, where it often decided the names to\nbe given to children, e.g. \u1e24asan and \u1e24useyn the two sons of \u02bfAl\u00ee, and\nlarger groups, as the three brothers Nab\u00eeh, Munabbih, and Nabah\u00e2n\n(_A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, VI. 101), Am\u00een, Ma\u02bem\u00fbn, and Musta\u02bemin the three sons of the\nKhalif H\u00e2r\u00fbn ar-Rash\u00eed. The practice is observable not only in the names\nof contemporaries, but also in genealogical series of names both of\nprehistoric and of historic times: e.g. Huz\u00e2l b. Huzeyl b. Huzeyl\u00e2, a\nman belonging to the \u02bfAdites (_Commentaire historique sur le po\u00ebme d\u2019Ibn\nAbdoun par Ibn Badroun_, ed. Dozy, Leyden 1848, p. 67. 1 text); the\nTham\u00fbdite \u1e32ud\u00e2r b. \u1e32udeyr\u00e2 (\u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee, _Mak._ p. 201); S\u00e2\u1e6dir\u00fbn b. As\u1e6d\u00eer\u00fbn\nal-Jarma\u1e33\u00ee, builder of the fortress \u1e24a\u1e0dr, the conquest of which is bound\nup with a story full of terrific tragedy (Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 284. 12), etc. An\ninteresting example of such grouping of nouns in modern popular rhetoric\noccurs in Burton\u2019s _Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Mecca and\nMedina_ (II. 146 of the ed. in two vols.). Secondly, in pairing names,\nthe Arabs are fond of allowing _assonance_ to prevail. So we have Rah\u00e2m\nand Ray\u00e2m, H\u00e2r\u00fbt and M\u00e2r\u00fbt, H\u00e2wil and \u1e32\u00e2wil, (see Bacher, _ibid._),\nY\u00e2j\u00fbj and M\u00e2j\u00fbj for the Biblical G\u00f4g and M\u00e2g\u00f4g. From the last instance\nit is evident that the inclination to form assonant pairs of names is\nnot foreign to the Hebrews; another Hebrew instance is Eld\u00e2d and M\u00ead\u00e2d,\nand from Talmudical literature Chill\u00ea\u1e33 and Bill\u00ea\u1e33. The assonance occurs\nnot only at the end of the words, the initial syllable being\nindifferent, but also inversely in the first syllable, the end of the\nword being indifferent. An instance of the latter is found in the names\nof the orthodox survivors of the \u02bfAd and Tham\u00fbd peoples in the\nMohammedan legend, J\u00e2bal\u1e33 and J\u00e2bars (or J\u00e2bar\u1e63, see Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 2; but\ncertainly not Jabulka and Jabulsa, as Justi writes in the _Ausland_ for\n1875, p. 306). Moreover, this love of assonance natural to Arabic\nwriters extends beyond the proper sphere of Arabic legends to foreign\nparts. An instance is found in the Romance of _\u02bfAntar_, XXIX. 72. 10,\nwhere two Franks, brothers, slain by \u02bfAntar, are called Saubert and\nTaubert. No doubt the writer had heard of Frankish names ending in\n_bert_; he had already mentioned a king Jaubert. The tendency to form\nsuch assonant names is so prevalent that the correct sounds of one of\nthe two are unhesitatingly corrupted for the sake of assonance. This was\nthe case with Y\u00e2j\u00fbj and M\u00e2j\u00fbj; another well-known instance is the pair\nof names Soliman and Doliman for Suleyman and D\u00e2nishmand. The Biblical\nSaul is called in the Mohammedan legend \u1e6c\u00e2l\u00fbt, for the sake of assonance\nwith J\u00e2l\u00fbt (Goliath).[765] It is also noteworthy that the first species\nof assonance is to be observed not only in personal names, but also in\ngeographical proper names, e.g. Kad\u00e2 and Kudeyy, two hills near Mekka\n(Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, IV. 245. 15), Achshan and Chusheyn, also hills (_ibid._ I. 164.\n12, and see the proverbs referring to them in al-Meyd\u00e2n\u00ee, I. 14. 2);\nSharaf and Shureyf, localities in Nejd (Ibn Dureyd, 127. 15.)\n\nThis phonological tendency produced also the name \u1e32\u00e2bil as an assonant\nwith H\u00e2bil. The name \u1e32ay\u00een \u2018Cain\u2019 was originally pronounced by the Arabs\nin its Hebrew form, which was particularly easy, because \u1e32ayn is an old\nArabic proper name.[766] Through the force of assonance \u1e32ay\u00een was\nchanged in the mouth of the people into \u1e32\u00e2bil, and this form made its\nway at a later time into literature and became general. Mas\u02bf\u00fbd\u00ee still\nknows the name \u1e32ayin, and expressly condemns the form \u1e32\u00e2bil as incorrect\n(_Les Prairies d\u2019or_, I. 62); and he quotes a verse from which it\nappears that the Biblical etymology from \u1e33\u00e2n\u00e2, which is equally\napplicable to the Arabic language, is known to him:\n\n Wa\u1e33tanay\u00e2-l-ibna fa-summiya \u1e32\u00e2yina * wa-\u02bf\u00e2yan\u00e2 nash\u02bfahu m\u00e2 \u02bf\u00e2yan\u00e2\n Fa-shabba H\u00e2bilu fa-shabba \u1e32\u00e2yin * wa-lam yakun beynahum\u00e2 tab\u00e2yun.\n\n They (Adam and Eve) gained the son; so he was called \u1e32\u00e2yin, * and they\n saw his growth as they saw it.\n So H\u00e2bil grew up, and \u1e32\u00e2yin grew up, * and there was no dispute between\n them.\n\nThe same is also evident from the fact that Mohammedan tradition makes\n\u1e32\u00e2bil live at a place \u1e32aneyn\u00e2 near Damascus (Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 588. 11), which\ncan only be explained from its phonetic resemblance to \u1e32\u00e2yin. Moreover,\nthe connexion in which Abulfaraj (_Historia Dynastiarum_, p. 8) puts the\ninvention of musical instruments with the daughters of Cain,[767]\naffords evidence for the former employment of the Biblical form of the\nname by the Arabs, since this tradition depends upon the Arabic word\n\u1e33ayn\u00e2 \u2018female singer.\u2019\n\nIn the Oriental Christian Book of Adam, which Dillmann has translated,\nthe word \u1e32ayin is interpreted \u2018Hater;\u2019 \u2018for he hated his sister in his\nmother\u2019s womb, and therefore Adam named him \u1e32ayin.\u2019 Dillmann justly\nconjectures that this idea is suggested by a derivation of the name from\n\u1e33inn\u00ea \u2018to be jealous of some one.\u2019[768]\n\n G. (_Page 116._)\n _Grammatical Note on Joel II. 2._\n\nI reserved the justification of the use which I made of the verse Joel\nII. 2 for a short excursus here. It is well known that in the Semitic\nlanguages the passive participle is frequently used instead of the\nactive, similarly to the English _possessed of_ instead of _possessing_,\nand the German _Bedienter_ for _Bedienender_. In Arabic (in which the\nnative grammarians call this usage maf\u02bf\u00fbl bima\u02bfna-l-f\u00e2\u02bfil) \u1e25ij\u00e2b mast\u00fbr\n\u2018the _concealed_ curtain,\u2019 is said for \u2018the _concealing_,\u2019 s\u00e2tir (\u1e32or\u00e2n,\nXVII. 47; compare al-\u1e24ar\u00eer\u00ee, 2nd ed., p. 528. 17) etc., in Aramaic ach\u00eed\n\u02bf\u00e2mart\u00e2 \u2018the conqueror of the world,\u2019 for \u00e2ch\u00ead; r\u00e2ph\u00fb\u1e33\u00e2 \u2018digger,\u2019 for\nr\u00e2ph\u00ea\u1e33 (Talm. Babyl. S\u00f4t\u00e2, 9 b.); in Samaritan keth\u00fbbh\u00e2 \u2018the writer,\u2019\n(Le Long, _Bibl. sacra_, p. 117; de Sacy, _M\u00e9moire sur la version arabe\ndes livres de Mo\u00efse_, in the _M\u00e9m. de l\u2019Acad. des Inscriptions_, 1808,\np. 16); in later Hebrew l\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbach \u2018buyer\u2019 instead of l\u00f4\u1e33\u00eaach keph\u00fby \u1e6d\u00f4bh\u00e2\n\u2018one who conceals the good he has received,\u2019 hence \u2018unthankful\u2019 (see\n_supra_, p. 193), instead of k\u00f4phe; d\u00f4bh cha\u1e6d\u00fbph \u2018a tearing bear,\u2019 for\nch\u00f4\u1e6d\u00eaph (Targ. II. Gen. XLIX. 27). So also frequently in Biblical\nHebrew, e.g. aha cherebh \u2018holding swords\u2019 for \u00f4chaz\u00ea, Song of Songs,\nIII. 8); \u02bfer\u00fbkh milch\u00e2m\u00e2 \u2018arranging battle\u2019 for \u02bf\u00f4r\u00eakh (Joel II. 5,\ncompare Jer. VI. 23, L. 42, where the verb \u02bf-r-kh, when used of drawing\nup the lines for battle, is followed by the preposition le; this,\nhowever, can be omitted, as in k\u00f4h\u00ean mesh\u00fbach milch\u00e2m\u00e2 \u2018a priest\nanointed for war,\u2019 in the Mishna). I put in the same category the\nshachar p\u00e2r\u00fbs in the verse now being considered, where in my opinion the\npassive p\u00e2r\u00fbs stands for the active p\u00f4r\u00eas.\n\nBut to understand my explanation of the verse it must also be noticed\nthat verbs which are regularly employed with a certain noun as subject\nor object in Hebrew can dispense with the noun, which then is implicitly\nincluded in the verb: a very natural proceeding. If I say, for instance,\n\u2018he clapped,\u2019 the verb contains in itself the notion \u2018his hands.\u2019 It is\nan elliptic, or rather pregnant construction where a noun is omitted,\nsimilar to that which is used to express motion by a verb not in itself\nimplying motion;[769] e.g. Num. XX. 26, we-Ahar\u00f4n y\u00ea\u02be\u00e2s\u00eaph \u00fbm\u00eath sh\u00e2m\n\u2018Aaron _was gathered_ [to his fathers or his people] and died there.\u2019\nThe words \u2018and died there,\u2019 render superfluous the complement el \u02bfamm\u00e2w\n\u2018to his peoples,\u2019 which is added in v. 24. Similarly with s-ph-\u1e33 \u2018to\nclap\u2019 the object kappay\u00eem \u2018the hands\u2019 can be omitted (Job XXXIV. 37;\nperhaps also Is. II. 6), etc. In the same list I put the p\u00e2r\u00fbs or p\u00f4r\u00eas\nof our passage: ken\u00e2phay\u00eem \u2018the wings\u2019 or ken\u00e2ph\u00e2w \u2018its wings\u2019 being\nomitted. The expression \u2018the spreading dawn\u2019 is intelligible by itself,\nas \u2018the dawn that spreads out its wings.\u2019 But the fact that the\ncomplementary object after p\u00e2r\u00fbs could be omitted proves how general was\nthe conception of the Bird of the Dawn with outstretched wings, which\nfound this mode of expression.\n\n H. (_Page 153._)\n _Hajnal._\n\nThe Hungarian language shows how speech wavers in determining the colour\nof the rising Sun. The Hungarian word for Dawn, hajnal, is\netymologically related to h\u00f3, which means _snow_. Therefore, the former\nmust have originally denoted \u2018the white;\u2019[770] and hajnalpir, \u2018the\nmorning Redness,\u2019 is literally \u2018the Redness of the White.\u2019 And the\nconception of the _redness_ of the dawn has overcome that which must\nhave prevailed when the expression hajnal came into use, but which is\nnow only recognisable by the help of grammatical analysis. This is\nevident also from the fact that in the district of \u00c9rmell\u00e9k people of\nred complexion are derisively called _hajnal_ (i.e. like the _red dawn_,\nbut strictly the _white dawn_).[771]\n\n I. (_Page 155._)\n _The Sun growing Pale and the Moon Red._\n\nAlthough, as we have seen, mythology ascribes a reddish as well as a\nwhite colour to the Sun, yet it must be observed that this is so only at\nthe earliest stage of the myth. A later period prefers to connect the\nSun with the conception of a reddish or yellow colour, leaving the white\nto the Moon, as more appropriate. L\u00e2bh\u00e2n, \u2018the white,\u2019 has not fixed\nitself in the language as a name of the Sun, whereas its feminine\nLebh\u00e2n\u00e2 has, as a name of the Moon. The conception of colour which the\nmyth attaches to Sun and Moon is well illustrated by a passage in which\nit is said that both Sun and Moon lose their natural colour through\nshame, viz., Is. XXIV. 23 wech\u00e2pher\u00e2 hal-lebh\u00e2n\u00e2 \u00fb-bh\u00f4sh\u00e2 ha-chamm\u00e2,\n\u2018The moon turns red and the sun pale, for Jahveh of hosts rules on Mount\nZion and in Jerusalem.\u2019 The distribution of the expressions for _shame_,\nb\u00f4sh and ch\u00e2phar, which elsewhere also stand in parallelism, is here not\narranged haphazard, since the Sun and the Moon are spoken of\u2014objects\nwhich are imagined to be provided with distinct colours of their own\u2014but\nmust correspond to the natural colours of each. Of _men_ both verbs are\nemployed without distinction; but \u2018making white\u2019 is the prevalent\nexpression for _putting to shame_, so that in a later age, \u2018to make\nwhite the face of a neighbour\u2019 became a fixed formula in that sense\n(ham-malb\u00een pen\u00ea chabh\u00ear\u00f4 or achw\u00e2r app\u00ea, B\u00e2bh\u00e2 Me\u1e63\u00ee\u02bf\u00e2 fol. 58 b;\ncompare Levy, _Chald. W\u00f6rterb._ I. 245 a; II. 173 a), and drove the\n\u2018causing to blush red\u2019 out of the field. The word b\u00f4sh for \u2018to be\nashamed\u2019 is moreover even in the earlier times commoner than ch-ph-r.\nThe former denotes \u2018to grow white,\u2019 and belongs etymologically to the\nsame group as the Arabic b\u00e2\u1e0d, whence abyad \u2018white;\u2019 the latter belongs\nto the group of the Arabic \u1e25-m-r (with a change of the labials _p_ and\n_m_), whence a\u1e25mar \u2018red.\u2019 Accordingly, the expression that the Sun b\u00f4sh\u00e2\n\u2018turns white,\u2019 and the Moon ch\u00e2pher\u00e2 \u2018turns red\u2019 presupposes the idea of\na reddish sun (Ed\u00f4m) and a white moon (lebh\u00e2n\u00e2).\n\nThe same relation between the colours of the Sun and the Moon is also\nassumed by the old Persian poet Asad\u00ee in his \u2018Rivalry between Day and\nNight,\u2019 a poem to which we had occasion to refer on p. 95. In it Day\nsays to Night:[772] \u2018Although the Sun walks yellow, yet he is better\nthan the Moon; although a gold-piece is yellow, yet it is better than a\nsilver groat.\u2019\n\n K. (_Page 155._)\n _Colour of the Sun._\n\nThe following is a literal translation of a passage in the Talm\u00fbd, which\nshows what speculations there were in a late age on the colour of the\nSun, and how, even when the technical terms of language were far\nadvanced towards settlement, people were by no means clear what idea of\ncolour was to be attached to the Sun. The passage occurs in the tract\nB\u00e2bh\u00e2 Bathr\u00e2, fol. 84 a. of the Babylonian Talm\u00fbd. To enable the reader\nto understand it, I need only premise that it is a discussion on a word\nexpressing colour, namely, shechamt\u00eeth. In the Mishn\u00e2 to which this\nextract of the Talm\u00fbd refers, the following words occur:\n\nShechamt\u00eeth we-nim\u1e63\u00e2\u02beath lebh\u00e2n\u00e2, lebh\u00e2n\u00e2 we-nim\u1e63\u00e2\u02beath shechamt\u00eeth\nshen\u00eahem yekh\u00f4l\u00een lachaz\u00f4r b\u00e2hen, \u2018When the buyer and the seller have\ncome to terms about wheat, which is to have the colour shechamt\u00eeth, and\nthe seller delivers white, or _vice versa_, then they can both annul the\nsale.\u2019 Now in the Talm\u00fbd it is taken for granted that this colour-word\nis derived from chamm\u00e2 \u2018sun,\u2019 and means \u2018sun-coloured.\u2019\n\nR\u00e2bh P\u00e2p\u00e2 says, \u2018As it is said [that the seller delivers] _white_ [as\nthe opposite to what was required], it is manifest that the sun is _red_\n(s\u00fbma\u1e33t\u00ee); and in fact it is red at rising and setting; and it is only\nthe fault of our vision, which is not powerful enough, that we do not\nsee it the whole day long of this colour. _Question_: It is said [of one\nspecies of leprosy], _A colour deeper than that of the skin_ (Lev. XIII.\nseveral times), that is the colour of the _sun_, which appears deeper\nthan that of the shade, whereas the passage manifestly speaks of the\n_white_ colour of leprosy? [so that the colour of the sun would be\nwhite.] _Answer_: Both is true of the colour of leprosy: it resembles\nthe sun-colour insofar as this is deeper than the shade [and this\npassage speaks of a species of leprosy in which the colour is deeper\nthan that of the skin]; but it fails to resemble the sun-colour insofar\nas the latter is red while it is itself white. But the putting of the\nquestion [which took for granted the white colour of the sun] assumed\nthe idea that the [originally white] sun takes a red tint at rising and\nsetting only because at rising it passes by the roses of the Garden of\nEden, and at setting passes the gates of G\u00eahinn\u00f4m [Hell, and in each\ncase the red tint of the object passed is reflected on the sun itself].\nSome assume the inverse condition [and suppose that the colours which\nlie at the opposite side of the heaven\u2014at rising that of Hell, and at\nsetting that of the roses of Paradise\u2014are reflected on the sun].\u2019\n\n L. (_Page 189._)\n _Transformation of Foreign Stories in Mohammedan Legends._\n\nThe Mohammedan legends and popular traditions present instances of\nborrowing stories which in some foreign cycle of legends are connected\nwith favourite heroes of that cycle, by substituting for the foreign\nheroes those who are well known in Mohammedan tradition. In this manner\nmany Iranian local traditions and stories were changed and interpreted\nin a Mohammedan sense after the subjection of the mind of \u00cer\u00e2n to the\ndominion of Isl\u00e2m. This phenomenon meets us at every step in the history\nof the religions and stories of the East and West. I will here limit\nmyself to the quotation of a single instance. The mountain Dem\u00e2wend in\nthe region of Reyy plays an important part in the old Iranian story of\nthe war of the great king Fer\u00eed\u00fbn with Zohak Buyurasp; to this mountain\nthe conqueror of the demons chained the inhuman monster and made it\npowerless for evil. Now the Mohammedan cycle of legends borrowed\nSuleym\u00e2n (Solomon) from the Jews, and invested him with the\ncharacteristics which the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 narrates of the great king of the\nHebrews; which characteristics, by the way, themselves point strongly to\nthe influence of the Iranian story of Fer\u00eed\u00fbn. Among these is especially\nto be reckoned the subjection of the demons by the mysterious ring,\nwhich passed from the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 into the \u1e32or\u00e2n (S\u00fbr. XXI. v. 82) and into\nIslamite tradition. When Dem\u00e2wend had become Mohammedan ground, it had\nto divest itself of memories of the old fabled Iranian king. \u2018The common\npeople believe,\u2019 it is said in Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, II. 607, \u2018that Suleym\u00e2n son of\nD\u00e2\u02be\u00fbd chained to this mountain one of the rebellious Satans named \u1e62achr,\nthe Traitor; others believe that Fer\u00eed\u00fbn chained Buyurasp to it, and\nthat the smoke which is seen to issue from a cavern in it is his\nbreath.\u2019 We learn, moreover, from this note that the original story\nstill possessed vitality alongside of the transformation. The\npreservation of old national memories was promoted partly by the\nintellectual movement excited in \u00cer\u00e2n by the \u2018King\u2019s Book\u2019 (Sh\u00e2h-n\u00e2meh),\npartly by national historians of a remarkable type, who were at the same\ntime proficient in Arabic philology and interested in the preservation\nof old memories of their own nation.[773] Appropriation and\ntransformation of Greek myths are probably rarer. The case quoted in the\ntext is an instance of such appropriation, in which the place of the\nless-known personages of the Greek myth is occupied by the more familiar\nones of Nimrod and his family. There are, however, also cases in which\nthe name is changed, although the abandoned one is quite as familiar as\nthat newly imported into the legend. An instance of this, from Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt\u2019s\n_Geographical Dictionary_, IV. 351. 16 _sq._, is as follows. The writer\nis speaking of a place called al-Laj\u00fbn west of the Jordan, and says: \u2018In\nthe middle of the village of al-Laj\u00fbn is a round rock with a dome\n(\u1e33ubb\u00e2) over it, which is believed to have been a place of prayer of\nAbraham. Beneath the rock is a well with abundant water. It is narrated\nthat on his journey to Egypt Abraham came with his flocks to this place,\nwhere there was insufficient water, and the villagers begged him to go\non farther, as there was too little water even for themselves; but\nAbraham struck his staff against the rock, and water flowed copiously\nfrom it. The rock exists to this day.\u2019 No further examination is needed\nto show that this Mohammedan legend is only a transformation of the\nBiblical one of Moses striking the rock and providing water for his\nthirsty people. Yet Ibr\u00e2him has been substituted for M\u00fbsa, a name\nequally familiar to Mohammedan legends.\n\nThis miracle of making water gush out by striking a hard substance with\na staff is, moreover, a very favourite one in legends, and is repeated\non other occasions, notably in the legend of King Solomon. It is said\nthat the well at L\u00een\u00e2, a watering station in the land of Negd in Arabia,\nwas dug by demons in the service of Suleym\u00e2n. For he once, having left\nJerusalem on a journey to Yemen, passed by L\u00een\u00e2, when his company were\nseized with terrible thirst, and could find no water. Then one of the\ndemons laughed. \u2018What makes you laugh so?\u2019 asked Suleym\u00e2n. The demon\nreplied, \u2018I am laughing at your people being so thirsty, when they are\nstanding over a whole sea of water.\u2019 So Suleym\u00e2n ordered them to strike\nwith their sticks, and water immediately gushed out. (Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, _ibid._ p.\n375. 22 _sq._)\n\n M. (_Page 212._)\n _The Origins._\n\nAs an example of this, I may mention that, in opposition to the Biblical\nMyth of Civilisation, which brings the planting of the vine into\nconnexion with Noah, the Rabbinical Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 makes even Adam enjoy the\nfruit of the vine, which was the forbidden fruit of Paradise.[774] The\nMohammedan legend names the Canaanitish king Daramshil, contemporary\nwith Noah, as the first wine-drinker, saying that he was the first who\npressed and drank wine: auwal man-i\u02bfta\u1e63ar-al-chamr washaribah\u00e2.[775] I\nalso observe in passing that a feature of the Noah-legend of the Arabs\nwhich is mentioned in my article quoted below, viz. longevity, seems to\nhave a connexion with the old Solar myth. Long life distinguishes the\nposterity of Adam in Genesis, and reaches its maximum in Methuselah. The\nlongevity which in the popular belief, especially in Italy, is ascribed\nto the Cuckoo (A. de Gubernatis, p. 519) is accounted for by its solar\ncharacter in the myth. Noah\u2019s longevity passed into a by-word in Arabic:\n\u02bfumr N\u00fb\u1e25 \u2018the length of life of Noah.\u2019 In the writings of the poet Ru\u02beb\u00e2\nwe find\u2014\n\n Fa\u1e33ultu lau \u02bfummirtu \u02bfumra-l-\u1e25isli * au \u02bfumra N\u00fb\u1e25in zaman-al-fi\u1e6da\u1e25li,\n\n\u2018I said, If I were made to live the lifetime of the lizard or the\nlifetime of Noah at the time of the flood.\u2019[776] Marz\u00fb\u1e33 al-Mekk\u00ee says,\nin a poem to Mo\u1e25ammed al-Am\u00een: Fa\u02bfish \u02bfumra N\u00fb\u1e25in f\u00ee sur\u00fbrin\nwa-\u0121ib\u1e6datin, \u2018Live the lifetime of Noah in joy and comfort\u2019 (A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee, XV.\n67. 4); and similarly Ab\u00fb-l-\u02bfAl\u00e2 (Sa\u1e33\u1e6d al-zand, I. 65. v. 4.):\n\n Fakun f\u00ee-l-mulki y\u00e2 cheyra-l-bar\u00e2y\u00e2 * Suleym\u00e2nan fakun f\u00ee-l-\u02bfumri N\u00fb\u1e25\u00e2.\n\n\u2018Then be in the government, O best of created beings, a Solomon, and be\nin length of life a Noah.\u2019 And we also find in \u1e24\u00e2fi\u1e93:[777]\n\n Come, hand me here the gold-dust, victorious for ever; be it poured,\n That gives us \u1e32\u00e2r\u00fbn\u2019s treasures rich _and Noah\u2019s age_ for our reward.\n\nBut a collateral reason for Noah being made a special example of\nlongevity may be found in the South-Semitic signification of the verb\nn\u00f4ch. In Ethiopic Noah is called N\u00f4ch, and the verb denotes _longus\nfuit_. And in an Ethiopic poem (in Dillmann\u2019s _Chrestomath. Aethiop._,\n111. no. 13. v. 1) it is said of Methuselah\u2019s longevity, \u00f4zawahabk\u00f4\n_n\u00fbch_ maw\u00e2\u02bfel la-Mat\u00fbs\u00e2l\u00e2.\n\n N. (_Page 254._)\n _Influence of National Passion on Genealogical Statements._\n\nThe same tendency which among the Hebrews caused the origin of the\nAmmonites and Moabites to be referred to the incestuous intercourse of\nLot\u2019s daughters with their father, produced exactly the same result many\ncenturies later in a different yet related sphere. It is known to\nstudents of the history of the civilisation of Isl\u00e2m that the best\nPersians, despite their subjection to the sceptre of Isl\u00e2m, strove long\nand actively against Arabisation, which they regarded as quite unworthy\nof the Persian nation, to them the more talented of the two. This\nreaction caused the publication of many literary documents; and produced\nespecially one very curious and not yet fully appreciated movement,\nwhich originated in the circle of the Shu\u02bf\u00fbb\u00eeyy\u00e2.[778] In order to\nappear as a member of the great family of Isl\u00e2m of equal birth with the\nArabs, the Persians took care to weave their own early history into the\nlegends of that religion. This was managed in two ways. _First_, they\nwere anxious to trace their genealogy to a son of Abraham, so as to\npossess a counterpoise to the Arabs and their father Ishmael. Thus it\nwas managed to refer the non-Arabs to Isaac, with a collateral intention\nof representing this descent as nobler than that from Ishmael.[779] And\nwe also meet with an allegation, in the Kit\u00e2b al-\u02bfayn, that Abraham had\nanother son besides Isaac and Ishmael, named Farr\u00fbch, from whom the\nnon-Arabs (al-\u02bfajam) descend.[780] _Secondly_, the genealogical sacred\nhistory is perverted in a sense hostile to the Arabs. Thus, for\ninstance, Ishmael is not allowed to be the son whom Abraham is about to\nsacrifice to All\u00e2h, but Isaac the ancestor of the non-Arabs, as the\nHebrew tradition has it[781]; and the story of the well Zemzem is put\ninto connexion with S\u00e2b\u00fbr the Persian king and with other\nreminiscences.[782] In the _Commentaire historique sur le po\u00ebme d\u2019Ibn\nAbdoun par Ibn Badroun_, published by Prof. Dozy, page 7 of the Arabic\ntext, we find various assertions relative to the derivation of the\nPersians. The majority of these genealogies trace the Persians back by\nvarious ways to S\u00e2m b. N\u00fb\u1e25 (Shem, son of Noah); one derives them from\nJoseph, son of Jacob. The ethnological derivation of a nation from S\u00e2m\nin the view of the Arabs certainly involves no idea of special\nexcellence in the nation concerned; for even the enigmatical Nasn\u00e2s of\nthe Arabic fables, a sort of monstrous half-men, half-birds (apes are\nalso called so in vulgar Arabic), are allowed to have a Semitic\ngenealogy.[783] But, at all events, no hostile intention lurks in the\npedigree from S\u00e2m. Thus the above genealogies, while possessing no\ntendency directly hostile to the Persians, are far from placing that\nnation in the foreground, and allow an unexpressed idea of the eminence\nof the Arabian nation to shine through. The case is very different with\nanother derivation propounded in the same passage. This makes the\nPersians to belong to the descendants of Lot, their ancestors being the\nfruit of his incest with his two daughters. The Samaritans say the same\nof the Druses.[784] I believe this genealogy is based on intention\nonly\u2014like the identical story told by the ancient Hebrews of Ammon and\nMoab. A local tradition, existing at Jeyr\u00fbd, a village to the north of\nDamascus, on the road to Palmyra, speaks of _a tribe of the people of\nLot_ as having dwelt on the ground now covered by a salt lake (Memla\u1e25a\nor Mell\u00e2\u1e25a), whose city was destroyed by the wrath of God.[785] This\nstory perhaps originated in some war of the later Mohammedan population\nagainst the older inhabitants or against Beduins who had taken up an\nabode there. It must also be observed that Mohammedan writers exhibit a\nprevailing tendency to remove far to the north, to \u1e24am\u00e2 and \u1e24aleb\n(Aleppo) in Syria, the mu\u02betafik\u00e2 or ma\u1e33l\u00fbb\u00e2, i.e. the Sodom of the\nBible. This follows from Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, III. 59, 124. In the particular case\njust mentioned, no doubt the existence of the salt lake cooperated in\nthe creation of the local tradition (in the language of the Talm\u00fbd the\nnotion of the Yam \u1e25am-melach \u2018Sea of salt\u2019 is greatly generalised and\nbecomes almost a figure of rhetoric; see the passages in the T\u00f4s\u00e2ph\u00f4th\non Pes\u00e2ch\u00eem, fol. 28 a. init. \u02bfAbh\u00f4dath); on the lake Yammune on the\nnorth of Lebanon, see Seetzen\u2019s _Reisen_, I. 229, 302, II. 338, referred\nto by Ewald, _History of Israel_, I. 314. Similarly a later Arabic local\ntradition localised an episode of the Sodom-story on the transjordanic\nshore of the Dead Sea. For it is evident that the story of the\nconversion of Lot\u2019s wife into a pillar of salt is the source of the\nfollowing popular tradition noted by Palmer (_Desert of the Exodus_, p.\n483). Not far from the Dead Sea, in the former country of Moab, at a\nplace called El-Yeh\u00fbd\u00eeyy\u00e2 \u2018the Jewess,\u2019 there is a great black mass of\nbasalt, said to have been originally a woman, who was thus changed into\nstone as a punishment for having denied the \u2018certainty of death\u2019\u2014a\nsomewhat obscure expression.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 740:\n\n I have referred to this in _Zeitschr. d. D. M. G._ 1870, XXIV. 207.\n\nFootnote 741:\n\n According to Rabbinical views, \u00c2bh\u00f4th V, Mishn\u00e2 21.\n\nFootnote 742:\n\n The author refers on p. 127 _recto_ to his earlier work, _Bi\u0121yat\n al-muta\u02bfallim wa-f\u00e2\u02beidat al-mutakallim_. \u1e24\u00e2j\u00ee Chalf\u00e2 does not know\n this book of the author\u2019s.\n\nFootnote 743:\n\n Ber\u00eash. r. sect. 53; see Beer, _Leben Abraham\u2019s_, p. 168, note 506.\n\nFootnote 744:\n\n See Steinthal, _Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft bei Griechen und\n R\u00f6mern_, p. 342.\n\nFootnote 745:\n\n See on ra\u1e25m\u00e2n and ra\u1e25\u00eem al-Bey\u1e0d\u00e2w\u00ee\u2019s _Comm. in Coranum_, ed.\n Fleischer, 5. 11.\n\nFootnote 746:\n\n _Kit\u00e2b al-a\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_, IV. 191. My translation differs from Sprenger\u2019s.\n\nFootnote 747:\n\n Sprenger, _Leben Mohammed\u2019s_, I. 112.\n\nFootnote 748:\n\n MS. of the Leipzig University Library, Cod. Ref. no. 357.\n\nFootnote 749:\n\n See Sprenger, _ibid._ p. 111.\n\nFootnote 750:\n\n See Lenormant, _Premi\u00e8res Civilisations_, I. 359.\n\nFootnote 751:\n\n _Aegyptische Studien_, in the _Zeitsch. der D. M. G._, X. 683.\n\nFootnote 752:\n\n _De Iside et Osiride_, c. LXXIV.\n\nFootnote 753:\n\n Herod. II. 73: \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03cc\u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f10\u03c1\u03c5\u03b8\u03c1\u03ac.\n\nFootnote 754:\n\n On other animals, rather fantastic than mythological, belonging to\n Egyptian antiquity, see Chabas, _\u00c9tudes sur l\u2019antiquit\u00e9 historique_,\n Paris 1873, pp. 399\u2013403.\n\nFootnote 755:\n\n Herod. II. 41: \u03a4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03bd\u03c5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n \u03bc\u03cc\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f30 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b8\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b8\u03b7\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u1f14\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b8\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u1f31\u03c1\u03b1\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 756:\n\n E.A. Bowring\u2019s translation of the _Book of Songs_, where the \u2018Nordsee\u2019\n is rendered \u2018Baltic\u2019!\n\nFootnote 757:\n\n Later Edda, I. 90, Gylf. 35.\n\nFootnote 758:\n\n Lepsius, _Aelteste Texte des Todtenbuchs_, Berlin 1867, p. 42.\n\nFootnote 759:\n\n _A\u0121\u00e2n\u00ee_ II. 118. 7.\n\nFootnote 760:\n\n See especially Schwartz, _Sonne, Mond und Sterne_, p. 30 sq.\n\nFootnote 761:\n\n See Gutschmid in _Zeitschr. d. D.M.G._ 1861, XV. 86.\n\nFootnote 762:\n\n See W. Bacher\u2019s Niz\u00e2m\u00ee\u2019s _Leben und Werke_, p. 21.\n\nFootnote 763:\n\n MS. of the Leipzig University Library, Suppl. 7. fol. 30 _recto_.\n\nFootnote 764:\n\n Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt. III. 92; Krehl, _Vorislam. Religion des Araber_, p. 12 etc. See\n also Ewald, _History of Israel_, I. 272. note 4.\n\nFootnote 765:\n\n See Frankel\u2019s _Monatsschrift f\u00fcr j\u00fcd. Geschichte_, II. 273. See on\n assonance of names, _Zeitschr. d. D.M.G._ XXI. 593.\n\nFootnote 766:\n\n E.g. \u1e24am\u00e2s\u00e2, p. 221; compare _Zeitsch. d. D.M.G._, 1849, III. 177.\n\nFootnote 767:\n\n See Gutschmid, l.c. p. 87.\n\nFootnote 768:\n\n In Ewald\u2019s _Jahrb. f\u00fcr bibl. Wissenschaft_, 1853, V. 139. note 53.\n\nFootnote 769:\n\n _Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar_, edited by R\u00f6diger, \u00a7 141; Ewald,\n _Ausf\u00fchrl. Lehrb. der. Heb. Spr._ \u00a7 282. c.\n\nFootnote 770:\n\n Paul Hunfalvy in the monthly magazine _Magyar Nyelv\u0151r_, 1874, III.\n 202.\n\nFootnote 771:\n\n Ibid., 1873, II. 179.\n\nFootnote 772:\n\n R\u00fcckert, l.c., p. 62. v. 18.\n\nFootnote 773:\n\n Such as \u1e24amz\u00e2 al-I\u1e93fah\u00e2n\u00ee; compare Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, I. 292\u20133, 791. 20; III. 925,\n 629. 18 _sq._, IV. 683. 10. and my _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte der\n Sprachgelehrsamkeit bei den Arabern_, Vienna 1871\u20133, no. I. p. 45 and\n no. III. p. 26.\n\nFootnote 774:\n\n Leviticus rabb\u00e2, sect. 12: \u00f4th\u00f4 h\u00e2-\u02bf\u00ea\u1e63 she\u00e2khal mimmenn\u00fb \u00c2d\u00e2m\n h\u00e2-r\u00eesh\u00f4n \u02bfan\u00e2bh\u00eem h\u00e2y\u00e2h.\n\nFootnote 775:\n\n Ibn Iyy\u00e2s, in the book Bad\u00e2\u02bfi al-zuh\u00fbr f\u00ee wa\u1e33\u00e2\u02bfi al-duh\u00fbr, Cairo 1865,\n p. 83: see my article _Zur Geschichte der Etymologie des Namens N\u00fb\u1e25_\n in _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1870, XXIV. 209.\n\nFootnote 776:\n\n Ibn al-Sikk\u00eet, p. 19, al-Jauhar\u00ee, s. v. f\u1e6d\u1e25l. On the proverbial\n longevity of the lizard see K\u00e2mil, ed. W. Wright, p. 197. 18;\n al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee, II. 34; al-Jauhar\u00ee, s. v. \u1e25sl; Burckhardt\u2019s _Reisen in\n Syrien_, note by Gesenius in the German translation, p. 1077.\n\nFootnote 777:\n\n Rosenzweig, III. 465.\n\nFootnote 778:\n\n See A. von Kremer, _Culturgeschichtliche Streifz\u00fcge auf dem Gebiete\n des Islams_, Leipzig 1873.\n\nFootnote 779:\n\n See Kit\u00e2b al\u02bfikd, MSS. of the Imperial Hofbibliothek, Vienna, A.F.,\n no. 84, vol. I. pp. 188 _sq._ The data bearing on this subject I have\n collected and published in a essay on the Nationality-question in\n Isl\u00e2m, written in Hungarian, Buda-Pest 1873.\n\nFootnote 780:\n\n See al-Nawaw\u00ee\u2019s _Commentary on Muslim\u2019s Collection of Traditions_, ed.\n Cairo, I. 124.\n\nFootnote 781:\n\n Compare al-Dam\u00eer\u00ee \u1e24ay\u00e2t al-\u1e25ayw\u00e2n, II. 316 _sq._\n\nFootnote 782:\n\n Al-Mas\u02bf\u00fbd\u00ee, _Les Prairies d\u2019or_, II. 148 _sq._; al-Kazw\u00een\u00ee, ed.\n W\u00fcstenfeld, I. 199; Y\u00e2\u1e33\u00fbt, Mu\u02bfjam, II. 941.\n\nFootnote 783:\n\n Al-Ma\u1e33r\u00eez\u00ee, _History of the Copts_, ed. W\u00fcstenfeld, G\u00f6ttingen 1847, p.\n 90.\n\nFootnote 784:\n\n Petermann, _Reisen im Orient_, I. 147.\n\nFootnote 785:\n\n Kremer, _Mittelsyrien und Damaskus_, p. 194.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX.\n\n\n TWO ESSAYS BY H. STEINTHAL,\n\n PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN:\n\n\n I\n\n THE ORIGINAL FORM OF THE LEGEND OF PROMETHEUS.\n\n\n II\n\n THE LEGEND OF SAMSON.\n\n _THE ORIGINAL FORM OF THE LEGEND\n OF PROMETHEUS_:\n\n A REVIEW OF AD. KUHN'S \u2018HERABKUNFT DES FEUERS UND DES G\u00d6TTERTRANKS.\u2019\n\n By H. STEINTHAL.\n\n ------------------\n\nThe soundness of a new discovery is attested in various ways, but\nespecially by the circumstance that the new thought is no sooner uttered\nin speech than it is seized upon and worked out by others besides its\nauthor; for the thought in question is thus proved to be really the\nsubject which the intellect of the time is best prepared to take up, and\nwhich will lead on the Past to the Future. This is found to be the case\nwith Comparative Mythology, Kuhn\u2019s new creation. When a large number of\nVedic Hymns\u2014text, translation, and commentary\u2014first appeared in Europe\nthrough the instrumentality of a German, Rosen (too early lost to\nscience), Kuhn saw at once not only that they were written in a more\nancient language than the classical Sanskrit, but, what was more\nimportant, that they opened up a source of mythological views which\nflowed from a more distant and primeval antiquity than is known to us\nanywhere else, and that this was the common source of the more important\nmyths and figures of gods of the Aryan nations. He then demonstrated\nthis, in successive essays on Erinnys, Despoina and Athen\u00ea, the\nKentaurs, Minos, Orpheus, Hermes, and on Wuotan (Odin) in the German\nmythology, by proving the identity of their names and myths with\ncorresponding ones in the Vedas. Kuhn\u2019s acuteness and skilful\ncombinations thus established the fact, of the highest importance to\nprimeval history, that the heathen Aryan nations possessed a belief in\ngods, the outlines of which dated from the age of their original unity.\nBut Kuhn saw also that two further facts followed from the first, one\nmore important, the other more interesting. By the former I mean the\nfact, that the Vedic myths still exist in so primitive a form as to\npoint to the ground of their own origin, and thus themselves to furnish\ntheir own certain interpretation. The latter is the fact that all\nSaga-poetry, whether epic or dramatic, artistic or popular, stands in\nconnexion with the oldest myths; and further, that the mythological\nfaith and worship, so far from being extinct even among the civilised\nChristian nations of Europe, still lives on in the rural classes of the\npopulation in spirit and practice, as superstition or sometimes as jest,\nthough of course not without frequent transformations and\ndisfigurements. This last point, however, had already been discovered by\nthe genius of Jacob Grimm, who only wanted the support of the Vedas to\nbecome the founder of Comparative Mythology, as he was of Historical\nGrammar. But this support was necessary to elevate Comparative Mythology\ninto a science based on method, and to give sufficient certainty to the\ninterpretation of myths and gods. The greatest genius\u2014fully entering\ninto the spirit of the ancient Greeks and Germans, and endowed with a\nlively sympathy with nature\u2014could, without the guarantee of the Vedas,\nnever have produced anything higher than unproved conjectures. It would\nhave remained impossible to demonstrate the original identity of\ndifferent gods, had not the Vedas given us the connecting terms. And the\nsense of the myths and gods could only have been vaguely and uncertainly\nguessed at, had not the language of the Vedas, with a happy transparency\nboth of grammar and of psychology, furnished the means of tracing the\ndevelopment of ideas from the most primitive impressions received by the\nsoul.\n\nStarting from the same fundamental idea as Kuhn, Roth proved, about the\nsame time, that the heroes of the New-Persian epos are only old mythic\nfigures of the religion of Zoroaster, which are equivalent in names and\nfunctions to certain Vedic gods. In the _Oxford Essays_ of 1855, Max\nM\u00fcller gave a sketch of Comparative Mythology, drawn in a certain\npoetical spirit which is quite in harmony with the subject. He\nendeavoured, very justly, to exhibit the essential connexion between the\npoetical and the mythic aspect, and to show that all formation of myths\nwas simply poetic invention. Kuhn\u2019s idea was immediately and generally\naccepted and worked out by all those who were engaged on the\nVedas\u2014Benfey, Weber, and others. Mannhardt has frequently elucidated\nGerman myths with penetrating thoroughness from Vedic-Indian ones.\n\nThus Kuhn\u2019s idea has with rare rapidity become a secure common property\nof science. In the book, the title of which is given at the head of this\narticle, he now gives an unsurpassable model of careful method in this\nfield of investigation. When the weight of every argument is tested with\nsuch accuracy and the conscientiousness of a judge, and exhibited so\nunvarnished and so entirely free from special pleading, and the\nconclusion is drawn with such cautiousness, as here, not only scientific\nbut also moral recognition is the writer\u2019s due.\n\nWe will first attempt to realise the result attained, and then proceed\nto a psychological analysis of it. I shall, however, here strictly\nconfine myself to the one mythical feature which forms the foundation of\n_Prometheus_. Kuhn\u2019s book contains, besides, an extraordinary multitude\nof mythological facts, grouped together as belonging to the subject\nmentioned in his title.\n\nIn the earliest times Fire must have been given to man by nature: there\nwas a burning here or there, and man came to know fire and its effects\nby experience. At the same time he learned also how to keep it in, and\nvery soon he may also have learned how to produce it. He took certain\nkinds of wood, bored a stick of the one into a stick or disk of the\nother, and turned the former round and round in the latter till it\nproduced flame. Kuhn has shown elaborately that the Aryan nations\u2019\noldest fire-instrument was formed in this way, and that the rotation of\nthe boring-stick was effected by a thread or cord wound round it and\npulled to and fro.[786] But man knew also of another sort of fire, that\nin the sky. Up there burned the fire of the Sun\u2019s disk; from thence the\nfire of the Lightning darted down. The primitive man, in his simplicity,\nbelieved the heavenly fire to be like the earthly; its effects were the\nsame, and it went out from time to time like the earthly fire.\nTherefore, Must not its origin also have been similar? must it not after\nevery extinction have been kindled again in like manner? There was no\nwant of the necessary wood in the sky. In the sky was seen the great\nAsh-tree of the world,\u2014in a configuration of clouds which is still in\nNorth Germany called the _Wetterbaum_, the _storm-tree_.[787] It was\nsupposed, before men believed in gods of human form, that the lightning\nfell down from this Ash-tree, against which a branch twined round it had\nrubbed till the fire was produced, as had been observed in forests on\nearth. The men thought that the earthly fire had its origin in the sky,\nand was only heavenly fire that had fallen down. They saw how it fell\ndown in the lightning; they recognised in the lightning a divine eagle,\nhawk, or woodpecker;[788] and many a bird which now flies about in the\natmosphere of earth is a fallen flash of lightning, proved to be such\neither by its colour or by some other circumstance. The wood, too, which\nwhen rubbed turns to fire, is similarly a transformed lightning-bird.\nThis is seen sometimes in the fiery-red colour of the fruit, _e.g._ of\nthe mountain-ash (rowan),[789] sometimes in the thorns or in the pinnate\nleaves of the plant, in which the claws and feathers of the\nlightning-bird are still recognisable. The rubbing merely revokes this\ntransformation: the igneous creature is enabled to take up again its\noriginal form.\n\nOriginally the bird was probably regarded as being itself the lightning,\nbecause inversely the lightning was treated as a bird. Afterwards it was\nthought that the bird which was at first perched upon the heavenly Ash\nthat produced the fire brought the fire down from the tree to the earth.\n\nBut further, Is not Life, too, a fire, burning in the body?\u2014and Death\nthe extinction of the flame? And as fire is kindled by boring with a\nstick in the hole of a plate of wood, so human life is produced in the\nwomb. And what happens now and always here on earth, happened up there\nin the Ash-tree of the world at the original creation of man. That Ash\nproduced, first Fire, and then Man, who is also fire. Indeed, strictly\nspeaking, this is still going on: the Soul is a lightning-bird that has\ncome down to earth, and the birds that bear down the fire\u2014such as the\nStork[790]\u2014still bring us children too, just as they brought the first\nman down to earth: in short, the Fire-god is also the Man-god.\n\nThen, at a later stage of the development of ideas, when the divine\npowers were imagined as personages in human form, the wonderful element\nof Fire, which drew to itself the attention of men no less by its\nmysteriousness than by its usefulness, was undoubtedly one of the first\ndivine figures to be personified. Now one of the oldest words for fire\nwas _agni-s_, Lat. _igni-s_. According to Benfey it comes from the root\n_ag_ \u2018to shine,\u2019 by means of the suffix _ni_; _s_ is the sign of the\nnominative. Therefore Agni is the Shining one, the Fire; but in the\nearliest times the word designated not the element Fire, but the god\nFire. He, the god Agni, had his abode in the wood, and was allured forth\nby the turning.\n\nAgni was fire and light in general, both the absolute element in general\nand also every special and separate manifestation of it: such as the\nbrilliant sky, the shining sun, the lightning, fire burning here for us,\nthe first man and progenitor of mankind. But alongside of this, the\npeculiar conception of the Lightning-Bird still continued. That also was\nconverted into a personal divine or heroic figure, which brought fire\nand man to the earth in the lightning. Sometimes Agni himself was called\na \u2018golden-winged bird,\u2019 even in the Vedic Hymns; and sometimes the bird\nwas made into a special god or hero distinct from Agni, bearing a name\ntaken from one of Agni\u2019s various epithets. Thus Picus, originally only\nthe woodpecker, was in the belief of the Latins the Fire-Bird. He was\nLightning and Man; and it was said later that the first king of Latium\nwas Picus, for the first man and father of mankind frequently appears in\nlocalised stories as the first king of the locality. Picus is shown to\nbe a Lightning-Bird and Lightning-Man, not only by his name and story,\nbut also by the manner of his worship: since he was regarded as the\nprotecting deity of women in childbed and of infants.[791]\n\nLess obviously, but not less certainly, a Lightning-Bird was preserved\nat Argos in Phoroneus. He, and not Prometheus, was said in the\nPeloponnesian story to have given fire to men; and in his honour a holy\nflame was kept burning on an altar at Argos. He was at the same time\nregarded as father of the human race. Having been originally a bird\nsitting on the celestial Ash-tree, he was made a hero, son of the nymph\nMelia, \u2018the Ash.\u2019 Now his name is Grecised from the Sanskrit\n_bhura\u1e47yu-s_, an epithet of the Fire-god Agni, denoting \u2018rapid, darting,\nflying,\u2019 thus picturing Agni as a bird. The name Phoroneus,\n_bhura\u1e47yu-s_, is in root (_bhar_ = \u03c6\u03b5\u03c1) and signification, though not in\ngrammatical form, equivalent to the word \u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.[792]\n\nIt was not possible to stop with the mere conversion of the bird into a\nperson. When the divine beings were once thought of as persons, they\nwere also allowed to appear and act as such. So men no longer imagined\nthe fire in the sky to be self-originated on the World\u2019s Tree, but\nregarded it as produced by gods, who acted similarly to men on earth,\nand revived the extinct flame of the sun hidden behind a mountain of\nclouds in the morning or during a storm, by driving a bolt into the\nsun\u2019s disk or into the cloud.\n\nThese are mythic conceptions of the very earliest age, but they contain\nin themselves a motive to further development, to give completeness to\nthe relations subsisting among them, or binding them to the natural\nphenomenon that they represent. Thus true myths arise.\n\nNow, the most striking peculiarity of fire was obviously the necessity\nof constantly kindling it again afresh, because when lighted it must go\nout again sooner or later. This aspect was exhibited in the following\nvery simple myth. Agni vanished from the earth; he had hidden himself in\na cave. M\u00e2tari\u015bvan brings him back to men. This myth is easily\nunderstood. The existence of the god Agni is assumed to be absolute and\nuninterrupted: but Fire is often not present; consequently the god must\nhave hidden himself. Where, then, can he be? Afar off, it is sometimes\nsaid, quite generally; another time it is said, In the sky\u2014which seems\nto be regarded as his proper home\u2014or with the gods. But sometimes he is\nnot there either, as at night or in a storm. Where is he, then? Why,\nwhere he is found; in the hollow of the cloud, from which he soon shines\nforth: in the hole of the disk in which the stick is turned round and\nround. Then, who finds him there, and brings him back to men? He who\nmakes the fire appear, or flame up, and thereby restores to men the god\nwho had withdrawn from them: that is, the Borer, or the Lightning which\nbores into the cloud as the stick into the wooden disk; it is\nM\u00e2tari\u015bvan, says the myth. This is a divine or semi-divine being, of\nwhom but little is known. He seems to be a figure which has never been\nfully crystallised;[793] regarded as a divine person, he fetches back\nthe Fire-God to men.\n\nThen the following terminology was introduced. The boring, by which man\nkindled fire and the sun when extinguished was lighted up again, was\ncalled _manthana_, from the root _math_ (_math-n\u00e2-mi_ or _manth-\u00e2-mi_,\n\u2018I shake, rub, or produce by rubbing\u2019). In German, the corresponding\nword is _mangeln_, \u2018to roll,\u2019[794] _Mangelholz_, used in North Germany;\n_manth_ here becomes _mang_, as _hinter_ is pronounced _hinger_, and\n_unter unger_. The boring-stick was probably originally called _matha_,\nfrom which _mathin_, \u2018a twirling-stick,\u2019 differs only in its suffix.\nVery soon, however, _matha_ appears to have been restricted to another\nsignification,[795] and then the fire-generating wooden stick was\ndesignated by a term formed from the same root with the preposition\n_pra_ prefixed, which only gave a shade of difference to the meaning,\n_pramantha_. But the fetching of the god Agni by M\u00e2tari\u015bvan (the\npersonified _pramantha_) is also designated by the same verb _mathn\u00e2mi,\nmanth\u00e2mi_, as the proper earthly boring. Now this verb, especially when\ncompounded with the preposition _pra_, gained the signification \u2018to tear\noff, snatch to oneself, rob.\u2019 Thus the fetching of Agni became a robbery\nof the fire, and the _pramantha_ a fire-robber. The gods had intended,\nfor some reason or other, to withhold fire from men; a benefactor of\nmankind stole it from the gods. This robbery was called _pram\u00e2tha_;\n_pram\u00e2thyu-s_ is \u2018he who loves boring or robbery,\u2019 a Borer or a Robber.\nFrom the latter word, according to the peculiarities of Greek phonology,\nis formed \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd-\u03c2, Prometheus. He is therefore a Fire-God, very like\nHephaestos, whose functions he often assumes. M\u00e2tari\u015bvan, who is quite\nsynonymous with him in meaning, derives his name still more directly\nfrom the Fire-God; for m\u00e2tari\u015bvan is originally a mere epithet of Agni;\nfor the boring-stick itself bursts into flame, and in so doing reveals\nitself as Agni. Originally a mere epithet, m\u00e2tari\u015bvan was subsequently\nseparated from Agni and made into a distinct person; but, as already\nobserved, without clearly-defined characteristics. Prometheus is the\nfire-generator, and as such the creator of the human race.[796] This\nrelation to men explains the affection for them which prompts him to\ngive them fire against the will of Zeus. He hid the spark of fire in a\nstem of Narthex,\u2014one of the kinds of wood which were used for the\nproduction of fire, and were regarded as transformed fire.\n\nFire on earth was the Fire-God descended from heaven; the first man was\nonly the same god in another form; consequently the first men\u2014the\nrepresentatives and benefactors of the human race\u2014the first kings\u2014the\nfounders of the great sacerdotal families among the priest-ridden\nIndians\u2014all were designated by attributes of the Fire-God. The family of\nthe A\u1e45giras-es acknowledges its descent from _A\u1e45giras_. But Agni himself\nis often called by this name; and indeed these two names, Agni and\nA\u1e45giras, come from the same root _ag_ or _a\u1e45g_, and have the same\nmeaning\u2014\u2018shining.\u2019 Thus, in the mythical view Fire existed in three\nforms: first, as actual fire, i.e. as the Fire-God; secondly, as\ngenerator, rubber, fetcher, and robber, of fire, i.e. as Pramantha,\nM\u00e2tari\u015bvan, Prometheus; and thirdly, as those for whom it exists, and to\nwhom it is given, i.e. as men. After the Fire-God has come down from\nheaven as man, he as man or as god fetches himself as god or divine\nelement to earth, and presents himself as element to himself as man.\n\nIn the view of primitive man the mediating term between heaven and earth\nlay in the Lightning. In the lightning he saw the Fire\u2014the god, the\nman\u2014fall from heaven. _Bh\u1e5bgu_,[797] originally _bhargu_, from the root\n_bharg_, from which the Latin _fulgeo, fulgur_, and the Greek \u03c6\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9 also\ncome, signifies \u2018the Shining,\u2019 \u2018the Lightning;\u2019 German _blitz_, which\nlatter word comes from the identical German root (Old High German\n_plih_, Middle High German _blic_).[798] Bh\u1e5bgu was said to be the\nancestor of the Bh\u1e5bgu-s, a sacerdotal family. To them, as\nrepresentatives of the human race born from the lightning, M\u00e2tari\u015bvan is\nsaid to have given the fire. But as the Bh\u1e5bgu-s are the lightning, and\nconsequently the Fire-God himself, the myth could be so turned round as\nto make M\u00e2tari\u015bvan fetch the god from the Bh\u1e5bgu-s as divine beings, or\nto make the Bh\u1e5bgu-s go after the traces of Agni, find him in the hole,\ntake him among men, and cause him to display his fire.\n\nIt is also told of the above-mentioned A\u1e45giras that _they_ found Agni\nhidden in the cave. They are, indeed, only the same god broken into\nfragments: the fire separated into individual cases of burning, flame\nflashing at various places.\n\nThus there is a mythical identity, on the one hand, between Prometheus\nand M\u00e2tari\u015bvan as fire-god and fire-fetcher, and on the other, between\nPrometheus and the Bh\u1e5bgu-s in the same capacities, except that the\nlatter are also representatives of mankind. And their relation to\nPrometheus can be authenticated in Greek myths as well. Bh\u1e5bgu is\nLightning in his very name. His son _\u0106yavana_ \u2018the Fallen\u2019 (from _\u0107yu_\n\u2018to fall\u2019[799]) is the Lightning again. Hephaestos, also, is well known\nto have fallen down. The name Iapetos appears most likely to express the\nnotion of \u2018the Fallen\u2019; only he is not the son, but the father, of\nPrometheus. Prometheus created men of clay, and the earth which he used\nfor the purpose was shown near Panopeus in Phokis, the seat of the\nPhlegyans; the Phlegyans, therefore, considered themselves the first\nmen: they are the Bh\u1e5bgu-s, Grecised regularly. The Indians had,\nmoreover, other ideas connected with the Bh\u1e5bgu-s which closely coincide\nwith those held by the Greeks concerning the Phlegyans; especially the\nconception that Bh\u1e5bgu, the ancestor of the Bh\u1e5bgu-s, like Phlegyas that\nof the Phlegyans, was hurled into Tartaros for pride and insurrection\nagainst the gods. The same characteristics, pride and opposition to\nZeus, as well as the punishment, are also found in Prometheus, who is\nidentical with the other two.\n\nThe identity of the Indian M\u00e2tari\u015bvan with the Greek Prometheus, and the\nexplanation of the latter thereby gained, are accordingly based on such\na coincidence of several mythical features and so similar a combination\nof these features, as cannot possibly be the work of chance; as well as\non several interpretations of names, which are intrinsically more or\nless certain. If we knew more of the Indian M\u00e2tari\u015bvan, or if the word\n_pram\u00e2thyu-s_, corresponding to the Greek Prometheus, could be\nauthenticated in the Vedas, then the certainty of all that has been said\nabove of the Greek Titan would force itself upon us. In compensation for\nwhat has not yet been found, and is perhaps lost for ever, it may be\nserviceable to learn about a host of divine beings described in the epic\npoems of the Indians, who have some connexion with the Fire-God and are\ncalled _Pramatha_-s or _Pram\u00e2tha_-s; they appear to be only the one\noriginal Pram\u00e2tha or Pram\u00e2thyu-s broken up into fragments.\n\nThis is, in Kuhn\u2019s profound exposition, the simplest and the pure form\nof the Story of Prometheus. Later, in Greece, it was brought into\nrelation to other stories in Hesiod\u2019s poetry; and again, with peculiar\nprofundity, into new combinations by Aeschylos. Prometheus received his\nhigher mental signification mainly through the fact that the Greek verb\n\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd-\u03c9, with which the name of the Titan was correctly assumed to be\nconnected, had taken a more mental meaning than the Sanskrit _mathn\u00e2-mi_\nor _manth\u00e2-mi_. The two verbs are obviously originally absolutely\nidentical; only the nasalisation of the root _math_ is effected\ndifferently in each language. We might suppose that the meaning \u2018to\nlearn,\u2019 which the root \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8 has in Greek, had grown out of the\nfundamental sense \u2018to shake\u2019; for learning is a shaking up, a movement,\nof the mind to and fro. Yet such a mode of conception might be scarcely\npossible to the mind of the primeval age in which that signification\nmust have grown up; the primitive act of learning was not such violent\nexertion as ours in modern times, but rather a simple _hearing_, a\nmental _reception_. Now as the Sanskrit word _mathn\u00e2mi_ grew into the\nmeaning \u2018to take\u2019 (as has been observed), it is more probable that the\nnotion of _learning_ was formed by the Greeks from this (\u2018snatching to\noneself, taking\u2019[800]), as Kuhn supposes. Then the physical sense of \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\nwas lost altogether to the Greeks; it was, indeed, still known that\nPrometheus was a fire-_taker_, but not that the name indicated this. So\nthey attempted to understand his name in a strictly mental sense, and\nremodelled the nature of the Titan accordingly.\n\nAccordingly, the answer to the question of the nature of the etymology\nof the name Prometheus must be this: Prometheus comes from a root _pra_\n+ _math_, which had the same meaning as the simple verb \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9. But the\nformation of the name from the verb is older than the appearance of any\nspecific Hellenism; for Prometheus was not formed by the Greeks. With\nthe verb _mathn\u00e2-mi_ the name _pram\u00e2thyu-s_, without any verb\n_pramathn\u00e2-mi_, was also delivered to them; and so there were in Greek\n\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 and \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2, but not \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9. The knowledge of the mutual\nconnexion of the two former words continued vivid in the language; and\nwhen the sense of \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 was spiritualised, the same change came over\nthat of Prometheus also. Besides this, the preposition \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf was\nunderstood, according to the usual Greek analogy, as \u2018beforehand\u2019; and\nthe verb \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 was then formed on Greek ground. Thus Prometheus\ncame finally to denote to the Greeks \u2018the Fore-learner, the Provident.\u2019\nI shall have more to say presently on this development. Let us pause for\na while here, and attempt the psychological analysis of the simpler form\nof the myth exhibited above.\n\nThe following definitions must be given in advance:\n\nEvery simple act of the soul and every simple occurrence in the soul\nshall be termed a _Motion_, that we may have a general word to embrace\nall psychological data and designate, so to speak, a psychical atom.\n\nSimple Motions _combine_ together for very various reasons and in\nvarious ways, which I need not enumerate here; e.g. a colour, a form,\nand a matter. Thus they form a _Combination_ of motions, e.g. \u2018a black\nround disk.\u2019\n\nSimple Motions, or single Combinations of them, in case they are not\ndistinct or distinguished from other simple motions or single\ncombinations on account of the similarity or equality of their contents,\n_coalesce_ with the latter into one motion or combination of motions, as\nthe case may be. For instance, to one who has not a clear sight, or has\nno sense of colour, or is looking at too great a distance, two colours\nthat are but little different will appear one and the same. If one sees\na ribbon today, and tomorrow sees at the same place another scarcely\ndiffering from it in colour, length, and breadth, one will suppose it to\nbe the same. Thus, Coalescence produces a loss of contents (for in the\nplace of two or more motions only one remains, whereas distinction\nbrings an enrichment of contents), but the loss is compensated by the\nforce of the motion.\n\nNot simple motions, but certainly combinations, can be _interlaced_\n(_sich verflechten_) with one another. Interlacing of combinations\noccurs when certain motions belonging to two or more combinations\ncoalesce, whilst the other motions belonging to them remain apart. The\ninterlacing of the combinations approximates more or less to a\ncoalescence of them in proportion to the number and value of the motions\nthat coalesce. On this more accurate definitions may be given presently.\nHere I will only allude to a frequently occurring instance: two words of\nsimilar sound in a foreign language are easily interlaced, even to the\npoint of perfect coalescence, i.e. they are confounded with each other.\nSo also two persons closely resembling each other. The coalescing\nmembers of the combinations here so greatly exceed in number and force\nthose that remain separated, that there is no consciousness of the\nlatter.\n\nWhen something presents itself to the mind to be perceived, estimated,\nor in the most general sense received, a certain procedure or\nnegotiation takes place between this something on the one side, and\ncertain older ideas, through the instrumentality of which the reception\nis to be effected, on the other. This procedure is _Apperception_: it is\nobviously far from a primary occurrence in the consciousness; it depends\nupon Coalescences, Interlacings, and Combinations of all sorts.[801]\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe primitive man saw fire on the earth and in the sky; or, to express\nit more precisely, he saw something burning, shining. From the\nconception of burning things the idea of Burning or Shining was\nextracted. The difference between Conception (_Anschauung_) and Idea\n(_Vorstellung_) must now be carefully noted.[802] The former is an\nundivided sum-total of many elements, corresponding to the object or\noccurrence presented to the senses. The thought of it is expressed in\nlanguage by a plurality of ideas, every one of which corresponds to one\nsingle element of the conception; so that the ideas are equal in number\nto the separate elements which are recognised and distinguished in the\nconception. Thus, to a single conception corresponds a combination of\nmany separate ideas. The two combinations of ideas concerning the\nheavenly fire and concerning the earthly, contained elements (ideas)\nwhich coalesced together; and thus they became interlaced with one\nanother. The conceptions of the two fires (as aggregate unities, in\nopposition to the ideas, into which they are broken up by the analysis\nof their elements) would not, indeed, easily coalesce; for as such\naggregates they appear to the observer too different from each other.\nBut when the conceptions are converted into combinations of ideas, which\nconversion is effected by language, then the related elements in the two\ncombinations come into prominence and coalesce, and thus produce an\ninterlacing of the combinations. But it must not be imagined that in\nthis interlacing only those elements are affected which coalesce, and\nthose which do not remain entirely unaffected by them; on the contrary,\nwhile the one set of elements press on towards coalescence, they are\nheld back by their connexion with the others. The coalescence is\ntherefore not quite perfect. Now, when on the one side even the\nnot-distinguished elements are protected against the coalescence to\nwhich they incline, on the other the distinct elements which keep the\ntwo combinations asunder are themselves drawn in to the inclination\ntowards coalescence. Thus the mutual relations of the combinations as\naggregates are disturbed by their interlacing; they do not become\nidentical, and yet are not severed: they become analogous.\n\nThe one is analogous to the other, the one gives the measure by which\nthe other is measured: the one is the more powerful, the ruling, that\nwhich gives the means of apperception; the other the weaker, the ruled,\nthe apperceived. How is this relation divided between the combinations\nof ideas of the earthly and the heavenly fire?\n\nNo doubt the heavenly fire is by far the greater and more effective, and\ntherefore also the more penetrating into the soul of man. Man soon\nrecognises the Sun as the source of the daylight and the origin of\ngrowth, and consequently as the giver of all wealth and all joy; and\nlearning, on the one hand, what the sun procures him, he also\nexperiences, on the other, by night and in winter, what it is to be\ndeprived of it. At its rising and setting, but most impressively in the\nthunderstorm, the sun surprises him by the grandest sights. Thus it\nmight be thought that the heavenly fire must give the measure for the\napprehension of the earthly, and therefore for that of fire in general.\nBut the matter demands more careful consideration.\n\nOnly the more powerful combination of ideas can give the measure and be\nthe organ of apperception. Now a physical occurrence which works more\npowerfully, i.e. with greater force, upon our senses, will indeed arouse\nstronger feelings; but we cannot speak of stronger sensations. For\ninstance, the vibrations of the air produce in the organ of hearing both\nthe sensation of a tone and a feeling of pleasure or pain. Stronger\ncommotions of air produce stronger and more painful feelings in the ear,\nbut not stronger sensations, only sensations of louder, stronger tones.\nIn memory we distinguish louder and softer tones merely in defining\ntheir contents, without meaning that the memory of the one is stronger\nthan that of the other. The sensation of a louder tone is not a louder\nsensation. Therefore, from the mere fact that the sun is brighter and\nspeaks louder to men in the thunder than the earthly fire, no greater\npower in human consciousness accrues to men\u2019s ideas of the heavenly\nfire.\n\nThe more important and impressive idea, too, is not necessarily also the\nmore powerful; for this quality also, importance and force of\nimpression, works in the first instance only on the feeling, not on the\ncourse of ideas also at the same time. A number or a name may be very\nimportant to us, and yet we forget it very soon.\n\nTherefore the power which an idea can exert on the consciousness, e.g.\nin an apperception, essentially depends on conditions which flow simply\nfrom the nature of our consciousness. I hope that the following\nexposition will meet with assent. Power, or influence on the\nconsciousness, is obtained by a combination of ideas through the number\nof its elements, through familiarity with it as an aggregate, and yet\nmore through accurate acquaintance with its separate elements by\nthemselves and in their relations both to one another and to elements\nbelonging to other combinations, and through the number and variety of\nsuch relations. Greater clearness in our consciousness of something is\nonly another mode of expression for more manifold distinction of the\nelements contained in it; and this implies increase of knowledge, but\nalso sharp definiteness and thoroughness.\n\nThere is a curious contrast between feeling and theory. In the latter\nclearness, careful assortment, delicate distinction, and reference, give\npreponderance; whereas it is the masses of unclearness that work most\npowerfully on the former.\n\nWe will measure by this principle the force of the ideas concerning the\nheavenly and of those concerning the earthly fire. The latter must be\nmuch more numerous, clear, definite, and certain, as man has the earthly\nfire nearer, and works in company with it, and work is a copious source\nof knowledge. The earthly fire is the only one that he knows; a heavenly\nfire he only infers. The earthly fire enlightens the darkness of his\nnight, which surrounds him as soon as ever it goes out; by it he learns\nthe operation of warmth: this first leads him to seek the cause of the\nbrightness and warmth of the day in the place where he sees something\nsimilar to his fire\u2014in the sun; especially as, when he sees no sun,\ndarkness and cold prevail just as when there is no fire. It is then the\nknowledge of the earthly fire that helps him to apprehend the kosmic\nfire; from the former he transfers his ideas to the latter. He\nexperiences the former only; he constructs or images to himself the\nlatter. Therefore, in the theoretical consciousness the ideas of the\nearthly fire are the more powerful and creative, and they give the\nmeasure; those of the heavenly are formed in conformity to them. The\nfeeling, on the contrary, is more powerfully affected by the heavenly\nthan by the earthly fire, because that is grander in its activity,\nmysterious in its appearance and disappearance, and independent of man.\nIt surprises, stirs, and troubles the mind in a higher degree, and\nexcites a more lively attention.\n\nNow the power exerted by ideas upon the feeling is certainly not without\ninfluence even on their theoretical connexion and distinction, on their\nprominence and their formation. Further, much as man may have to do with\nfire, often as he may kindle it and put it out, variously as he may\nemploy it, still he never fully understands it as to its appearance,\nmode of working, and essence. Now it always seems that the great must be\nthe generator of the small, the strong the point of departure for the\nweak, the worthy and impressive more original than the mean and\nineffective. If therefore, on the one hand, the ideas of the celestial\nfire are formed by analogy with those of the terrestrial, on the other\nhand, the latter are complemented by being put into connexion with the\nformer. First of all the question is asked, What is there above?\u2014and the\nanswer is, The same as here below. But then comes the question, Whence\ncomes this that is here below, and what is it?\u2014and the answer is, It\ncomes from above, and is the same as what is above. There above is the\ngreat, the self-subsisting, the adorable; it has descended to earth to\ndo us good. Thus the idea of the heavenly is attained through the\nearthly; but the origin of the latter removed to the upper regions.\n\nThus it comes to pass that, although the ideas of the earthly fire are\nprior in psychological perception and give rise to those of the\nheavenly, still man holds the heavenly fire to be the original and\ncreative one, from which the other is derived. He is so overpowered by\nthe grandeur, wonder, and unapproachableness of the celestial element,\nthat he regards the fire which he kindles for himself as fallen down\nfrom on high and given to him.\n\nMan receives certain visual sensations of the Sun; and he converts these\ninto a conception, or an object, by apperceiving them with the ideas\nthat he has of fire. Thus he makes of them a fiery wheel. The ideas of\nthis wheel are partly the same as those of the earthly fire, partly\ndifferent; for they are distinct in the elements of place, size, effect,\nand dependence or independence. Thus arises an interlacing of the two\ncombinations of ideas, as has been already observed. The disturbance\nproduced among the ideas by this relation impels to a double\napperception of the two combinations, first on the part of what is alike\nin them, and next on the part of what is different. The first\napperception results in the comprehension of the two combinations as\nfire; the other in the separate conceptions of a divine and an earthly\nfire. This latter separation contradicts the first comprehension; and\nthis contradiction is composed by a new process of apperception, in\nwhich both the likeness and the difference are regarded as the\nconsequence of the relation of originality or derivation, in which the\nearthly fire stands to the divine. They are both really the same,\nnamely, the god Agni, who lives above and descends to men.\n\nFor the separation of the combination of ideas of the celestial fire\nfrom that of the terrestrial, is not sufficiently supported to offer an\neffectual opposition to the coalescence to which the most essential\nelements tend. All the difference that declares itself here resolves\nitself ultimately into one point only; for the differences of nearness\nand distance, of greatness and smallness, and whatever else may be added\nto these, all unite in the one point of the independence of the\ncelestial fire and the dependence of the terrestrial. But this point is\nvery weak. For even the terrestrial fire is observed by man to be not\ndependent on him, and seems to him to be even less so than it is in\nfact. The primitive man does not think he actually generates the fire by\nboring: he regards his action as scarcely more than a petition to the\nfire to appear. And if the fire then does appear, it does so as a free\nand kindly being that has an independent existence. Where, then, could\nit live in its own character, if not on high? It lives there for itself\nand for ever; here it comes down out of kindness.\n\nHaving thus discovered the psychological foundation for the fact that\nthe primitive man regarded the fire as a god, we will endeavour to make\nclear to ourselves also the first forms of mythical conceptions.\n\nWe must imagine the primitive man placed as he was freely in the midst\nof nature. He saw the sky, the sun, clouds, and in the storm the\nlightning, and likewise heard thunder. He saw, he heard:\u2014this means only\n\u2018he received sense-impressions.\u2019 These may no doubt have formed\nthemselves into an image; still the image was not yet an object placed\nbefore his mind,\u2014not yet a conception. When we see something strange to\nus, we ask, What is it? Yet we see clear, and have a definite image of\nthe thing; then what more can we have to ask about it? We want to know\nalso the purpose, origin, and regulation of what we have seen, so as to\nbe able to find a place for it in the series of things previously known,\nor, if there is no suitable place, at least to find out its relation to\nthat series. Nothing less will satisfy us; then it is no longer an\nisolated image, but a conception, an object; then we have apperceived\nit. It remains therefore for the mind to convert the image into an\nobject through apperception. But certain means are demanded by the mind\nfor all its creations, _i.e._ for everything that it makes its own by\nthought. The sensations\u2014all that is presented by the senses: tones,\ncolours, touch\u2014are merely matter which the mind appropriates to itself.\nThe means whereby this appropriation is rendered possible are not\ndelivered to it by the organs, nor yet innate in it and ready for use.\nOn the contrary, as in trade and commerce possession is multiplied by\npossession, so also the mind enriches itself every time by means of that\nwhich has been already gained; every acquisition is made a means towards\nits own enlargement. Thus then the primitive man apperceived the descent\nof the lightning and the sun\u2019s rays by means of that which his mind\nalready possessed. But I must insist on the necessity of caution. In\nspeaking here of the \u2018descent of the lightning and the sun\u2019s rays,\u2019 I\nhave presented and apperceived a certain physical occurrence in the way\nin which we are now wont to do in conversation. But that is not the way\nin which the primitive man spoke; and we have still to enquire how he\ndid speak. For him there was as yet no sun, no lightning, no ray; of all\nthese he knew nothing. He saw at first only _something shining_, in\nvarious forms and movements. But he had not set himself the task of\nworking further with his mind at this presentment of the senses: his\nconsciousness passively received motions, out of which mythical ideas\ngrew up. He apperceived unconsciously, and of course with the ideas that\nhe already had; his mind built with the materials that it possessed.\nWhat, then, was likely to be the result of his building?\n\nWhich, of all the creatures known to man, passed through the sky like\nthe sun, darted down and cut through the air like the lightning and the\nray of light? Only the Bird. This comparison of the bird with the\nmanifestations of light, was made immediately and unconsciously. Among\nthe ideas about the bird, motion through the air was the most prominent;\nso when this motion was perceived, the aggregate of ideas about the bird\nwas instantly ready to operate as a means towards the apperception that\n\u2018What moves in the air is a bird.\u2019 It comes down from the heavenly tree.\nThus then the Fire-god Agni, as god of the lightning, is invoked as a\nfiery, golden-winged bird. The bird in general is next individualised\ninto an eagle or falcon\u2014a strong, swift bird, that darts down with might\nand majesty.\n\nThis apperception was one of the simplest, and was made unconsciously,\nas has been said. The idea of motion through the air presented by the\nlightning, and the same idea derived from the combination of ideas of\nthe bird, coalesced and became one. The mere smallness of man\u2019s\nknowledge of the lightning caused the entire combination of ideas of the\nlightning to be drawn into that of the bird, whereby the latter\ncombination was enriched so far as to admit the existence of a most\nwonderful divine bird beside the earthly ones. Thus no conscious\ncomparison between lightning and bird took place; but immediate\ncoalescence of the two was effected by the single conception of the\nlightning-bird, in which men were not conscious of any dualism. What we\ncall lightning, was to the primitive man a bird, not lightning at all.\n\nBut also conversely, what we call a bird of this or that kind\u2014eagle,\nvulture, or woodpecker\u2014was to him lightning. The original meaning of the\nname \u03c6\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cd\u03b1\u03c2, given by the Greeks to a kind of eagle or vulture\u2014which,\nas has been noticed, has a connexion with _Blitz_, the Phlegyans and the\nBh\u1e5bgu-s\u2014was not \u2018a bird as swift as lightning,\u2019 but \u2018lightning\u2019 itself.\n\nThus, then, a multitude of mythical conceptions exhibit the lightning as\nsome kind of bird, or a bird in general. So Phoroneus, \u2018the quickly\ndescending\u2019 (p. 368), is in origin only an epithet of the powerful bird,\nand the Sabine goddess Feronia presents the corresponding feminine form;\nand numerous superstitions are founded on the recognition of lightning\nin a bird.\n\nStill there is a difference between lightning and a bird flying; and\nthis did not escape the notice of the primitive man. Nevertheless, so\nfar from this difference having power to cancel, when once accomplished,\nthe coalescence of the ideas of lightning and bird, and the unconscious\napperception of the former through the latter; the difference itself was\nrather apperceived only in conformity with this coalescence. The\ndifference was without any reflexion explained thus: when the bird has\nonce descended flashing with lightning, it flashes no more; it is now\nonly a lightning that has become weakened and earthly. Or it may also be\nsaid: the bird is not itself the lightning, it has brought the lightning\ndown.\n\nBut where, then, has the lightning gone? It has shone for a moment, and\nvanished. It shone as if it were fire (_fulgeo_ = \u03c6\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9). Or perhaps it\nhit and fired something\u2014then, whether it be bird or no, it is clearly\nfire. We must figure it to ourselves thus. In the sky, at the farthest\nlimits of the space which the eye can reach, the primitive man saw\nlight, radiance, brightness, in an overpowering degree; there he saw the\nsun and stars. He knew only the things on earth; only ideas of earthly\nthings formed the possessions of his mind; and on the dark earth he knew\nnothing similar to those things of the upper world, except fire; only by\nhis idea of this could he apperceive those. Now fire darts down from\nabove before his very eyes. Now all is explained: the earthly fire comes\nfrom above, and the upper fire, having descended, conceals itself at\nonce, by a transformation, in the body from which he extracts fire\u2014in\nwood.\n\nBut now the relations are becoming more complicated; and already they\nare so far complicated that the original idea of the Lightning-Bird\ncannot be retained in its simplicity. Alongside of it the idea of the\ndeity, or of the divine essence, has been everywhere developed; and the\nfire, the lightning, the golden-winged bird, has become the god Agni.\nNow the ideas of fire also take a new and less simple form.\n\nThe flame breaks forth from the wood: consequently, it must have been in\nit for a long time. The boring and rubbing in a certain way move Agni to\nappear: such action is therefore loved by the god, he allows himself to\nbe drawn forth by it. If he loves it, it cannot be indifferent to the\nman who yields himself to the god in fear and thankfulness. It is a holy\naction. The pieces of wood which he stirs hold the god concealed. All\nappears divine to him, and his consciousness tarries in a world of gods.\nFor the slight separation which he can make between the fire on high and\nthat below, consists merely in the distinction between essence and\nmanifestation. But wherever the god manifests himself, why there he is\nfor certain. Consequently, during the holy act of kindling fire the two\ncombinations of ideas of the God-Fire and of the earthly fire coalesce\ncompletely; there only remain ideas of one fire. But it was the ideas of\nthe divine fire that completely absorbed those of the earthly.\nUnresisted, they exert an exclusive power over the consciousness and\nentirely fill it. Man is removed in spirit from the earth into the world\nof gods. He has forgotten everything sensuous and earthly, and sees and\ntouches only gods and divine things. And every perception received from\nhis senses is directly laid hold of by the ideas respecting the world of\ngods of which his consciousness is full, and has a place and\nsignificance assigned to it among them. The pieces of wood are no longer\nwood; the borer, the really active piece that draws the god forth, is a\ndivine being that fetches the god. The god is concealed in the hole of\nthe disk, but this is transformed in conception into a locality in the\ncountry of the gods\u2014a hollow, in which the god is found. It is an\noccurrence that took place among the gods: the divine Pramantha fetches\nAgni out of the hollow.\n\nThe flaring of the flame, however, brings the consciousness back to the\nearth: Pramantha has brought the god to earth. We must realise the\nrevolution effected in the consciousness by the fire breaking out. The\ncombination of ideas concerning the earthly fire, which had coalesced\nwith the other combination concerning the divine fire, is, by the\npresent perception, again introduced into the consciousness as a special\npower, and its coalescence with the other conception is thereby\ncancelled. Against the sensuous impression of the present actual fire\nthe circle of ideas of the divine one cannot maintain its supremacy. It\nretires and leaves the foreground of the consciousness to the circle of\nideas of the earthly fire. But all this appeared to the primitive man\nnot a psychological, but a real procedure; not a shifting of ideas, but\nan actual shifting of the imagined reality. When attention was shifted\nfrom the one circle of ideas to the other, guided by the idea of fire,\nwhich bound the two together, then it appeared to the primitive man as\nif the actual fire had removed from the one into the other, and had come\nfrom heaven to earth; and the already-begun fancy that the god Pramantha\nhad fetched Agni, is accordingly carried on to the further point of\nsaying that he put him among men.\n\nMan soon observed in the sky on an enlarged, divine scale, the identical\nprocess which he had learned when producing fire by rotation. Agni\ndwells in the bright, clear, light sky. But the sky is overcast and\ndarkened by a thunder-cloud: Agni has concealed himself; he has hidden\nhimself in the hollow of the cloud. He breaks forth from it, being\nfetched by a divine Pramantha, M\u00e2tari\u015bvan, the Lightning. The lightning\nbores into the cloud as the earthly borer into the wooden disk:\nPrometheus, or Bh\u1e5bgu and his descendants the Bh\u1e5bgu-s, fetch the god from\nhis hiding-place. They go down to the earth with him and take him to\nmen.\n\nThe primitive man does not ask, Where does the fire come from? what\nbecomes of the fire that has fallen from heaven? Before he asks this,\nand without his asking, he sees, and the lightning tells him, that the\nfire comes from heaven, and the wood tells him that the lightning (Agni)\nis concealed in the wood. Neither does the primitive man ask, Where does\nman come from? He sees it, and practises it.[803] The birth of man is a\ngenerating of fire. When the primitive man sees a tree, he does not ask,\nWhat is it? but by the sight of the tree present before him the\ncombination of ideas respecting trees which is already formed in his\nmind is without his observation recalled into his consciousness; and\nthis combination appropriates to itself the present sight, the\nperception coalescing with the combination of ideas through the\nsimilarity of their contents: and thereby what is seen is apperceived as\na tree. Similarly, when the primitive man figures to himself the act of\ncopulation, it is the combination of ideas of producing fire by rubbing\nthat enters into his consciousness on account of the similarity of the\nmovement, and gives him an apperception of that act. The similarity of\nthe two acts seems to the primitive man greater than to us. On the one\nhand, the production of fire is to him a religion and a divine energy;\non the other, man is already regarded by him as a fire-creature,\nlightning-born quite as much as a bird. The two combinations of ideas do\nnot, indeed, coalesce; but yet are greatly interlaced with each other in\nsome of their essential elements. The opposition between the partial\ndifference which separates the combinations and the partial similarity\nwhich unites them, leads to a solution in a double and reciprocal\napperception: first, that the divine rubber, Pramantha or Prometheus,\ncreated man, or that lightning, Bh\u1e5bgu, Yama, or the lightning-bird\nPicus, was the first man; secondly and conversely, that the production\nof the flame by rubbing is the production of the Fire-God Agni, and that\nthe wood is the cradle of the new-born god. Thus Agni remains always the\n\u2018new-born\u2019 and the \u2018youngest,\u2019 as he is called in the Vedas; and\nDionysos, also a fire-god, appears as \u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, a god in a cradle.\n\nThe primitive man was convinced that man was fire. Indeed, his wonder at\nhis own lightning-nature was aroused every time that he produced the\ngod; and when sacerdotal families had gained the exclusive privilege of\nkindling fire, these families traced their origin to Bh\u1e5bgu or Agni, and\ncalled themselves Bh\u1e5bgu-s, A\u1e45giras-es, etc. For they continued to do\njust what their ancestor, the Lightning, had done before them.\n\nThis is, as far as I can give it, the psychological explanation of the\noriginal forms of the stories of the Descent of the Fire. The\nsuperstition attached to these stories, in ancient as well as in modern\ntimes, would be more fittingly considered separately. The peculiar\nformation of the character of Prometheus among the Greeks however, may\nstill engage our attention a little longer.\n\nPrometheus is a god and yet a Titan also. He is the greatest benefactor\nof the human race. Yet in all other cases the mythical idea is that\nwhoever does good to man is also friendly to God, and that only those\nwho do harm to man rebel also against God. For the elucidation of this\nmost peculiar and contradictory position, the following points seem to\nme worth pondering.\n\nAll the forces and occurrences of nature show two sides; one beneficial\nto man, and one hostile to him. So also the myth almost always discovers\nin the one and the same natural event, a good and a bad god. The bad god\nis hostile at once to men and gods. The development of a myth frequently\ntakes the course of converting one of the epithets of the god who\nrepresents some process of nature, into a good god, and another into a\nbad god. The course to be followed in such a case is frequently\ndetermined by the nature or significance of the epithets themselves. Now\nit is certain that Hephaestos and Prometheus are identical in their\norigin, as indeed is shown in the story of the birth of Athene, in which\nthe head of Zeus is cleft by either one or the other of them. But both\nHephaestos and Prometheus are Agni in different forms. We have seen what\nPrometheus signifies. Somewhat of the physical signification must have\nstill clung to this name even when it came upon Greek ground.\nHephaestos, on the other hand, possessed from its very origin the finest\nsignification of Agni; for it probably represents Agni as a home-god,\nguardian of the family, as a god of the hearth. And Hephaestos was still\nworshiped by the Greeks as a hearth-god. It surely seems natural, then,\nthat the ideas of the beneficent action of fire should fasten themselves\nto him. But, on the other side, to make Prometheus, the Fire-stealer, an\nactual enemy of the gods, was impossible, for the very reason that he\nhad been a benefactor of men by giving them fire, and was also the\ncreator of men. Thus, he, as a god, became the champion of mankind\nagainst the injustice of the gods. It must be added that, perhaps even\nin the age of the unity of the Aryan race, the Fire-god, in his capacity\nas god (creator) of mankind, was also a god of Thought, who among\nprimeval circumstances could scarcely be anything else but a god of\nPrudence, or foreseeing caution\u2014an idea which gave the Romans their\nMinerva, but which might very naturally be attached to a god of fire,\nsince prudence is exhibited nowhere more plainly than in the use of\nfire. At all events, even in the Vedas, Agni has the epithet _pramati_,\nwhich would yield something like \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b9-\u03c2 in Greek. Epic story made\nPramati an independent personage, a son of \u0106yavana (_supra_, p. 373),\nthe \u2018Fallen,\u2019 who is a son of Bh\u1e5bgu, the Lightning. Thus in sense, if\nnot in name, the Indian Pramati is equivalent to Prometheus.\n\nPrometheus is Fire-god, Man-god, God of human energy in thought. In this\ncapacity he comes into collision with the supreme god. So he appears in\nHesiod, and also in Aeschylus, except that the latter was able to give a\nfar deeper meaning to the guilt of Prometheus, to his entire relation to\nZeus, and therefore also to his ultimate reconciliation.\n\nThus then in Prometheus is comprised the whole essence of heathenism:\ndeification of Man and Nature. He was the most characteristic figure of\nthat mode of conception which created gods in the image of man. But the\nopposite mode of conception, according to which man was created like one\nsingle god, and was expected to make himself like God in life, produced\na figure opposed to that of Prometheus\u2014Moses. I speak here not of the\nhistorical, but of the mythical Moses; and I hope that the reader will\nbe inclined to distinguish the two as clearly as we distinguish the\nhistorical and the legendary Charlemagne. Now the mythical Moses may be\ncompared in meaning with Prometheus. Prometheus ascended to heaven and\nfetched down fire from the altar of Zeus for men. Moses also went up and\nbrought back the Tables of his God with the fundamental laws of all\ncommon human moral life; for this act Moses could not come into conflict\nwith God. But the original heathen myth respecting Moses was different.\nMoses struck water out of the rock with his staff: the staff is the\nlightning, the rock the cloud, the water the rain. Kuhn has shown at\nlength what a close connexion subsists between the procuring of water,\nwine, honey, mead, and soma, and the bringing down of fire,[804] (like\nthe connexion between rain and lightning), and that they are so to\nspeak, mythical synonyms. And this water did cause a difference between\nMoses and God. Now the reconciliation is brought about by Aeschylus by\nmaking both Prometheus and Zeus purify themselves and bind themselves by\nmoral elements. But the monotheistic spirit of the Prophet transfigured\nthe entire myth, and put in the place of the water and the fire the Word\nof God; and then no reconciliation was needed, for God spoke with Moses\nas his servant and messenger. Yet alongside of this monotheistic myth of\nMoses who brings down the Word of God, there remained also the old\nheathen one, which said that he brought water. It was a correct feeling,\nor a lingering consciousness which had been retained, that declared that\nMoses had sinned in the matter of the water, although it was no longer\nknown in what the sin consisted.[805] Therefore I interpret and clear up\nthe obscured remembrance or suspicion of the author of the Book of\nNumbers, by saying that, forasmuch as Moses strikes water out of the\nrock with his staff, he is a heathen god, a M\u00e2tari\u015bvan, a Pramantha, and\ntherefore in opposition to the one true God, and must die; but forasmuch\nas he gives the Word of God to men, he is the Prophet without his equal.\n\n ------------------\n\n _THE LEGEND OF SAMSON._\n\n By H. STEINTHAL.\n\nWhen an author can presume that his readers share his views on things in\ngeneral, and also accept like principles respecting the special sphere\nto which his subject belongs, it may be fitting to descend from the\ngeneral to the particular. But when, as is now more frequently the case,\nno such assumption can be made, the opposite course, from the particular\nto the general, is preferable for the sake of both the matter and the\nmanner of the investigation itself. I shall therefore adopt it.\n\nI shall, therefore, at the outset leave out of the question what view it\nis possible to hold respecting the growth of the people of Israel, and\nespecially of their monotheism. I shall not proceed on the assumption\nthat any particular view is proved true, but try whether, after the\nconsideration of our subject in its details, any result affecting\ngeneral questions is reached. I also for the present leave undetermined\nthe value of the Biblical Books as sources of history, the period of the\ncomposition of the separate books, and even their relative age\u2014i.e. the\nearlier or later compilation of one with reference to others. For all\nthese are still disputed points; and I desire not to build upon any\nunproved assumption, but to see how much can be contributed to the\nsolution of the questions that arise. Even the question, whether, and\nhow far, we are justified in treating the history of Samson in the Bible\nas legend,[806] may be left to be answered only from the result of the\nfollowing enquiry. If, on comparing these stories with other nations\u2019\nstories, similarities are discovered alongside of much that is\ndissimilar, nothing shall, in the first instance, be decided about the\ncause and significance of such similarities, but new investigation shall\nbe made on the subject.\n\n I. THE ADVENTURE WITH THE LION, AND THE RIDDLE.\u2014\n THE FOXES.\n\nI pass over the narrative of the birth of Samson for the present,\nintending to come to it only after the contemplation of his actions. The\nreason for this arrangement will then become apparent. I therefore\ncommence with Samson\u2019s first action.\n\nIt is narrated (Judges XIV.) that Samson was attacked by a lion when on\nthe way to see his bride, and killed him. When he went by the same road\nto his wedding, he looked at the carcase of the lion, and found a swarm\nof bees and honey in it. This occurrence suggested the following riddle,\nwhich he put forth at the wedding-feast: \u2018Out of the Eater came forth\nMeat, and out of the Strong [Wild] came forth Sweetness.\u2019 By his bride\u2019s\ntreachery the riddle was solved: \u2018What is sweeter than honey? and what\nstronger than a lion?\u2019\n\nSamson\u2019s riddle is still a riddle even to us now. It has never yet been\nsolved, as far as I know; certainly not in the Bible itself, for the\nanswer there given is a still greater riddle than the riddle itself,\nwhich seems not to have been observed. Only look closely at the\npretended solution. It looks as if the question had been: \u2018What is the\nsweetest, and what the strongest?\u2019 But the actual problem was: \u2018Out of\nthe wild eater comes sweet food;\u2019 how that came to pass, was the\nquestion\u2014and still is a question. For even the story of the slain lion\nand the honey found in his carcase cannot contain the solution, because\nit involves a physical impossibility. Bees do not build in dead flesh;\ntheir wax and honey would be spoiled by putrefaction. In no such wise\ncan honey come out of the lion. Besides, Samson would be very foolish to\nbase a riddle on a mere personal experience known to no one; it would\nthen be absolutely insoluble. We cannot credit the original narrative\nwith so gross an ineptitude. Then what is the position of the affair?\n\nIt is certain that a riddle like the one in question was in circulation\namong the ancient Hebrews, and that Samson was believed to have proposed\nit. It is equally certain that its solution lay in the words transmitted\nfrom antiquity: \u2018What is sweeter than honey, what stronger than a lion?\u2019\nBut it is not only to us at the present day that this solution is as\nobscure as the riddle itself; it was quite as unintelligible to the\nlatest elaborator of the Book of Judges. So he attempted a solution on\nhis own responsibility. He had two data in his possession: the riddle,\nand the story of the lion-killing. Well, he concluded, Samson must have\nfound honey in the carcase of this lion. What he had wrongly inferred,\nhe narrated as a fact which ought to yield the solution of the riddle.\nBut we must guess better. If it is certain that Samson cannot have found\nhoney in the lion\u2019s carcase, yet, on the other hand, the pretended\nsolution at least proves that by the strong eater the lion is to be\nunderstood, and by the sweet food the honey. And if this was solution\nsufficient for the legend, it follows that at the time when the riddle\narose some connexion between lion and honey was so definitely and\nclearly present to the consciousness of every individual, because held\nby the mind of the entire people, that it came into prominence as soon\nas ever lion and honey were named together: somewhat as among us when we\nspeak of bear and honey together, though with reference to something\nelse.[807] But there must have been some known connexion which made it\nevident how honey came out of the lion. It is our task now to discover\nthis connexion if we are to attempt the solution of the riddle\u2014one which\nis more than thirty centuries old, and the unriddling of which has been\nforgotten for some twenty-five. Can there be any other riddle of equal\ninterest? In the following remarks I endeavour to solve it.\n\nWhen once we know that the Eater in the riddle is the Lion, of course it\nis natural to think of the lion killed by Samson; and the compiler of\nthe Book of Judges would not have fancied that the honey was in its\ncarcase, but for an obscure memory that this particular lion had\nsomething to do with it. Now to us this lion is not a real but a\nmythological one, i.e. a symbol. And we know the meaning of the symbol.\nHerakles also, it is well known, begins his labours by killing a lion.\nThe Assyrians and Lydians, both of them Semitic nations, worshipped a\nSun-god named Sandan or Sandon; he also is imagined to be a lion-killer,\nand frequently figured struggling with the lion or standing upon the\nslain lion. The lion is found as the animal of Apollon on the Lycian\nmonuments as well as at Patara.[808] Hence, it becomes clear that the\nlion was accepted by the Semitic nations as a symbol of the summer heat.\nThe reason of the symbol was undoubtedly the light colour, the colour of\nfire, the mane, which recalled Apollon\u2019s golden locks, and also the\npower and rage of the wild beast. The hair represents the burning rays.\nSo we have here to do with the sign of the Lion in the zodiac, in which\nthe sun is during the dog-days. At this season the sky is occupied by\nOrion, the powerful huntsman\u2014of whom I shall presently have a few words\nto say\u2014and Sirius, who in Arabic is designated \u2018the Hairy\u2019 in reference\nto his rays.\n\n\u2018Samson, Herakles, or Sandon kills the lion,\u2019 means therefore, \u2018He is\nthe beneficent saving power that protects the earth against the burning\nheat of summer.\u2019 Samson is the kind Aristaeos who delivers the island of\nKeos from the lion,[809] the protector of bees and hives of honey, which\nis the most abundant when the sun is in the Lion. Thus sweet food comes\nout of the strong eater.\n\nVery possibly and probably, however, there was a superstition to the\neffect that bees are generated out of the lion\u2019s carcase, in the same\nway as they are believed by some nations to spring from an ox\u2019s\ncarcase.[810] But such a superstition must have some basis, and no other\nbasis is easily conceivable but the mythological one which I have\nmentioned. What was true in symbol, that the Lion produced honey, was\ntaken as true in fact. For I must insist on the fact that, according to\nthe literal meaning of the Hebrew, no mere taking of the honey from\noutside a lion\u2019s skeleton is meant, but its being actually produced by\nthe lion.\n\nHowever, when we try to clear up to our own minds what has been said, we\nstumble upon a difficulty. It is after all the Sun that produces the\nsummer-heat; Apollon sends the destructive shafts. Therefore, if the\nSun-god does battle against the summer-heat, he is fighting against\nhimself; if he kills it, he kills himself. No doubt he does. The\nPhenicians, Assyrians, and Lydians attributed suicide to their Sun-god;\nfor they could only understand the sun\u2019s mitigation of its own heat as\nsuicide. If the Sun stands highest in the summer, and its rays burn with\ntheir devouring glow, then, they thought, the god must burn himself; yet\ndoes not die, but only gains a new youth in the character of the Phenix,\nand appears as a gentler autumn-sun. Herakles also burns himself, but\nrises out of the flames to Olympos.\n\nThis is the contradiction usual in the heathen gods. As physical forces\nthey are both salutary and injurious to man. To do good and to save,\ntherefore, they must work against themselves. The contradiction is\nblunted when each side of the physical force is personified in a\nseparate god; or when, though only one divine person is imagined, the\ntwo modes of operation\u2014the beneficent and the pernicious\u2014are\ndistinguished by separate symbols. The symbols then become more and more\nindependent, and are ultimately themselves regarded as gods; and whereas\noriginally the god worked against himself, now the one symbol fights\nagainst the other symbol, one god against the other god, or the god with\nthe symbol. So the Lion represents as a symbol the hostile aspect of the\nSun-god, and the latter must kill him lest he should be burned himself.\n\nSamson also unites both aspects in himself. The Hebrew story makes him\noperate even on the pernicious side, but against the foe. To the foe he\nis the scathing Sun-god. This is the sense of the story of the Foxes,\nwhich Samson caught and sent into the Philistines\u2019 fields with\nfirebrands fastened to their tails, to burn the crops. Like the lion,\nthe fox is an animal that indicated the solar heat; being well suited\nfor this both by its colour and by its long-haired tail. At the festival\nof Ceres at Rome, a fox-hunt through the Circus was held, in which\nburning torches were bound to the foxes\u2019 tails: \u2018a symbolical reminder\nof the damage done to the fields by mildew, called the \u201cred fox\u201d\n(_robigo_), which was exorcised in various ways at this momentous season\n(the last third of April). It is the time of the Dog-star, at which the\nmildew was most to be feared; if at that time great solar heat follows\ntoo close upon the hoar-frost or dew of the cold nights, this mischief\nrages like a burning fox through the corn-fields. On the twenty-fifth of\nApril were celebrated the Robigalia, at which prayers were addressed to\nMars and Robigo together, and to Robigus and Flora together, for\nprotection against devastation. In the grove of Robigus young dogs of\nred colour were offered in expiation on the same day.\u2019[811] Ovid\u2019s story\nof the fox which was rolled in straw and hay for punishment, and ran\ninto the corn with the straw burning and set it on fire,[812] is a mere\ninvention to account for the above-mentioned ceremonial fox-hunt; still\nit has for its basis, though in the disguise of a story, the original\nmythical conception of the divine Fire-fox that burns up the corn.\n\nThe stories of Samson hitherto discussed seem to me so similar to the\nEastern and Western ones that I have compared, their interpretation so\ncertain, and their sense so essential to the character of the Sun-god,\nthat I am of opinion that even the coincidence of collateral points\ncannot be treated as accidental. The Bible says that Samson killed the\nlion with his bare hands: \u2018there was nothing in his hand.\u2019 But Herakles\nalso kills the Nemean lion without his arrows, by strangling him with\nhis arms. This feature, too, is probably significant. The Greek myth\nsays that the reason why Herakles could not use any weapons was because\nthe lion\u2019s hide was invulnerable; but this is pure invention. The truth\nseems to me to be, that the weapons possessed by the Sun-god are\nactually his only in so far as his symbol is the lion; for they consist\nof the force and efficacy of the Sun. Now when the Sun itself is to be\nkilled, that cannot be done with the very weapons which are its\nstrength. The god is forced to catch the burning rays in his own arms;\nhe must extinguish the Sun\u2019s heat by embracing the Sun, i.e. by\nstrangling or rending the lion.\n\nThe following point is less clear, but surely not without significance.\nThe Philistines avenge the destruction of their cornfields, vineyards,\nand olives by Samson, by burning his bride and her father. This causes\nSamson to inflict a great defeat on his enemies; but after the victory\nhe flies and hides in a cavern.[813] What means this behaviour, for\nwhich no motive is assigned? What had Samson to fear in any case, but\nespecially after such a victory? But let it be remembered that Apollon\nflies after killing the dragon; so also Indra after killing V\u1e5btra,\naccording to the Indian legend in the Vedas; and that even \u00cal, the\nSemitic supreme god, has to fly. Thus Samson\u2019s retreat, mentioned, but\nnot very clearly expressed because not understood, by the Biblical\nnarrator, appears to indicate this often-recurring flight of the Sun-god\nafter victory. In the tempestuous phenomena, in which two powers of\nnature seemed to be contending together, men felt the presence of the\ngood god; but after his victory, when all was quiet again, he seemed to\nhave I withdrawn and gone to a distance.\n\nBut if on the last-mentioned point the story is seen to be shrouded in\nmuch obscurity, this is the case in even a higher degree with the two\nnext-following deeds of \u1e62amson.\n\n 2. THE ASS\u2019S JAWBONE.\n\nWe come to Samson\u2019s heroism displayed with the ass\u2019s jawbone. There is\nmuch difficulty here, and it will be impossible to be certain as to the\ninterpretation. But it must be noticed at the outset that the story\nbelongs strictly to a certain locality. Its field of action is a\ndistrict between the Philistine and the Israelite territories, which was\ncalled \u2018Jawbone,\u2019 or perhaps in full, \u2018Ass\u2019s Jawbone,\u2019 and doubtless\nreceived this name from the peculiar conformation of the mountains.\nPointed rocks probably formed a curved line, and thus presented the\nfigure of a jawbone with teeth. Between these teeth of rock there may\nhave been a cauldron-shaped depression, which had the appearance of an\nempty place for a tooth; and just there a spring, no doubt a well-known\nand perhaps a particularly healing one, must have risen.[814] So,\nalthough the story wishes to derive the name from Samson\u2019s feats, the\ntruth is rather that the name and the territorial conditions produced\nthe transformation of the story.\n\nNow I must first remind the reader of the tongue of land in Lakonia\nclose to the promontory of Maleae, which stretches out into the Lakonian\ngulf opposite the island Kythera: it bears the very same name as the\nplace where Samson performed his feat, Onugnathos (\u2018Ass\u2019s Jawbone\u2019). The\nname is certainly only the Greek translation of an original Phenician\nname. From Strabo[815] we learn little or nothing of this peninsula.\nPausanias[816] reports that there had been on it a temple of Athene\nwithout image and without roof. Now this Athene was probably identical\nwith a modification of the Astarte of Sidon, Athene Onka, who was\nworshipped at Thebes also. And it may be significant, that there was in\nthat temple a monument to Menelaos\u2019 steersman, who was called Kinados\n(\u2018Fox\u2019). At all events _Onugnathos_ proves a myth, known also to the\nPhenicians, of which an ass\u2019s jawbone was an essential part.\n\nBut the ass, like the fox, was in many nations sacred to the evil\nSun-god, Moloch or Typhon, on account of his red colour, from which his\nname in Hebrew is taken. The Greeks say that in the country of the\nHyperboreans, hecatombs of asses were offered to Apollon. But he was\nalso ascribed to Silenos, the demon of springs, on account of his\nwantonness; and this may perhaps furnish the explanation of the\ncelebrated spring at this place, which has its rise in the Jawbone.\nPerhaps formerly there was at this spring, which was called \u2018Spring of\nthe Crier,\u2019[817] a sanctuary where the priests of the Sun-god gave out\noracles, as those of Sandon, the Lydian Sun-god, did at a spring in the\nneighbourhood of Kolophon. And the ass is a prophetic animal: I need\nonly refer to Balaam\u2019s ass.\n\nTo ancient tradition must undoubtedly be ascribed the exclamation which\nSamson is said to have uttered on this occasion: \u2018With an ass\u2019s jawbone\na heap, two heaps\u2014with an ass\u2019s jawbone I slew a thousand men.\u2019[818] Now\nBertheau conjectures[819] that this short verse had originally \u2018_at_ the\nplace called _Ass\u2019s Jawbone_ I slew,\u2019 and that the story of Samson\ngaining a victory with an ass\u2019s jawbone arose solely from false\ninterpretation of it; and no doubt the Hebrew preposition _be_ can\ndenote \u2018in, at\u2019 quite as well as \u2018with.\u2019 The same scholar observes\nfurther, that according to the story the rocks called \u2018Jawbone\nHill\u2019[820] are, themselves, the very ass\u2019s jawbone that was thrown away\nby Samson after his victory; for only so is it intelligible that a\nspring should gush out of the cast-away jawbone, as the story goes on to\nrelate.[821] To this I must add, that the throwing of the jawbone seems\nto me the most essential and original feature in the whole story, from\nwhich the name and origin of the locality, and the victory with the\njawbone also, were developed. For surely the jawbone cannot be anything\nbut the Lightning, just as in Aryan mythology the head of an ass, or\nstill more that of a horse, denotes a storm-cloud, and a tooth,\nespecially the tusk of a boar, signifies the lightning.[822] Here then\nwe have a thunder-bolt thrown down in the lightning\u2014the instrument with\nwhich the Sun-god conquered, and at the same time formed the locality.\n\nI have two more observations to make here. We nowhere find Samson armed\nwith the weapons which we see almost everywhere else in the hands both\nof the Greek and of the Oriental Herakles\u2014the mortar-club (pestle) or\nthe bow and arrows. The club had the appearance of a mortar with the\npestle in it, or of a tooth in its cavity; and in Hebrew one word[823]\ndenoted both a mortar and the cavity of a tooth.[824] The second remark\nrelates to the Spring. The Bible tells that Samson, wearied out by the\nmurderous contest, at length sank down, faint with thirst, and prayed to\nGod, saying \u2018Thou hast given this great deliverance into the hand of thy\nservant, and now I shall die for thirst and fall into the hand of the\nuncircumcised!\u2019 upon which God made the spring burst forth. This might\nbe a fiction, in which Samson was depicted under human conditions; and\nthe story of the spring given to relieve Hagar and Ishmael might in that\ncase serve as a model for it. But perhaps the following combination will\nnot be found too far-fetched. The Solar hero wages war with the mischief\ndone to nature by an excess of heat. Thus the battle of Herakles with\nAntaeos is only the form localised in the deserts of Libya, of the story\nof the contest against the stifling heat, against the simoom which gains\nits strength from the sandy soil, as Movers, who also sees in the\nErymanthean boar only a variant of Antaeos, has ingeniously explained.\nIn Tingis, i.e. Tangier, the grave of Antaeos was shown, _with a spring\nbeside it_. A similar legend among the Hebrews might perhaps assume in\ntime the above strictly Jahveistic form. In that case the national\ninstinct of Israel would have retained only the spirit and sense of the\nold story, while putting off all the heathen form and substituting a\nJahveistic one for it. This would require no reflexion indeed, but\nundoubtedly much creative power of popular imagination. The fact, that\nin the Hebrew story the spring is put into combination with the jawbone,\nwould seem to me, connecting it with my conception of the latter as\nLightning, to indicate that the spring is the Rain, which breaks forth\nfrom the cloud with the lightning.\n\n 3. SAMSON AT GAZA.\n\nIt is related[825] that to escape out of the Philistine town of Gaza by\nnight, Samson pulled up the city-gates with their posts and bars, and\ncarried them to the top of the hill opposite the city of Hebron; which\nseems an utterly senseless practical joke, though quite in keeping with\nSamson\u2019s overweening jovial character. It will probably be difficult to\nmake out with any certainty what is the foundation of this legend. It\nseems probable to me, however, that we have to do here with a disfigured\nmyth, of the same import as that of the descent of Herakles into the\nnether-world,[826] which originally declared that Samson broke open the\ngates of the well-bolted (\u03c0\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2) Hades. As in the Greek story of\nHerakles the fight at the _gate_ of the nether-world, \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bd\n\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9, was transformed into a fight at Pylos,[827] by a mere play on\nwords; so in the Hebrew story, instead of the gates of the nether-world\nor of death (sha\u02bfar\u00ea m\u00e2weth), those of the city called the Strong (Gaza,\nor properly \u02bfAzz\u00e2) might be named. The cause for which Samson went down\ninto the nether-world was forgotten, and a new motive was invented by\nthe legend for his visit to Gaza, in keeping with the licentiousness of\nhis character. The fact that he starts at midnight, and does not sleep\ntill morning, is certainly not without significance, but contains a\nremembrance of the circumstance that the deed took place in the\ndarkness, i.e. in the nether-world. And the feature of the story which\ntells that Samson carries the gates to the top of a hill, must have been\nsuggested by some local peculiarity in the form of the rock. But very\nprobably the recollection of a myth which made the Solar hero bring\nsomething up from the nether-world had also some influence on the story.\n\n 4. SAMSON'S AMOURS.\n\nThe circumstance that Samson is so addicted to sexual pleasure, has its\norigin in the remembrance that the Solar god is the god of fruitfulness\nand procreation. Thus in Lydia Herakles (Sandon) is associated with\nOmphale the Birth-goddess, and in Assyria the effeminate Ninyas with\nSemiramis; whilst among the Phenicians, Melkart pursues Dido-Anna.\n\nThe beloved of the god is the goddess of parturition and of love. She\nis, in general terms, Nature, which is fructified by the solar heat,\nconceives and bears; or is specially identified with the Moon, or even\nwith the Earth, but more frequently with Water\u2014originally rain, and\nsubsequently the sea and rivers also, and finally (the rain being\nregarded as mead or wine) the vine, caressed by the sun. Thus Venus\nrises out of the sea; and Semitic goddesses have fish-ponds dedicated to\nthem. Iole, whom Herakles woos, is the daughter of Eurytos, the\n\u2018Copiously Flowing.\u2019 Of the three Philistine women whom Samson\napproaches, only one\u2014the one who brings about his ruin\u2014is named. Her\nname, Del\u00eel\u00e2, denotes, according to Gesenius, _infirma_, _desiderio\nconfecta_, i.e. the \u2018Longing, Languishing,\u2019 and according to Bertheau\nthe \u2018Tender;\u2019 at all events, it refers to love. She lives in the\n\u2018Vine-Valley,\u2019[828] and consequently appears to represent the vine\nitself, which the Sun-god is so zealous in wooing; indeed, even the name\nDel\u00eel\u00e2 might denote a Branch, a Vine-shoot. Deianeira, also, is the\ndaughter of Oeneus the \u2018Wine-man,\u2019 or, as others say, of Dionysos.\nOrion, who stands so near to the Sun-god, woos the daughter of Oenipion\nthe \u2018Vine.\u2019 But even supposing\u2014what is very possible\u2014that Del\u00eel\u00e2\noriginally denoted a Palm-branch, we know that the palm was sacred to\nAsherah.\n\nBut yet another combination appears admissible. Del\u00eel\u00e2 may also signify\nthe \u2018Relaxed, Vanishing,\u2019 as a Moon-goddess. This goddess is indeed\noriginally a chaste virgin; but in Tyre and Assyria she also assumes the\ncharacter of Birth-goddess, and is variously served by strict chastity,\nby sacrifice of children, and by prostitution of virginity.\n\nThe coalescence of the chaste and cruel goddess with the luxurious one\nis exhibited in Semiramis, who is said to have killed her husband and\nall her numerous lovers. This might have given to the story of Samson\nits present form, which represents his ruin as brought about by a woman.\nBut this leads to the following point.\n\n 5. SAMSON\u2019S END.\n\nLooking back, we find that we may probably regard as certain the\nproposed interpretation of the killing of the lion, of the foxes\ncarrying firebrands, and of Samson\u2019s sexual passion: while the deeds\nwith the jawbone and the gates must be termed uncertain. Now Samson\u2019s\nend brings us back into perfect clearness; it refers again to the Solar\ngod. If the hair is the symbol of the growth of nature in summer, then\nthe cutting off of the hair must be the disappearance of the productive\npower of Nature in winter. Samson is blinded at the same time, like\nOrion: this again has the same meaning, the cessation of the power of\nthe Sun. Again, Samson and the other Sun-gods are forced to endure being\nbound: and this too indicates the tied-up power of the Sun in winter.\n\nThe final act, Samson\u2019s death, reminds us clearly and decisively of the\nPhenician Herakles, as Sun-god, who died at the winter solstice in the\nfurthest West, where his two Pillars are set up to mark the end of his\nwanderings. Samson also dies at the two Pillars, but in his case they\nare not the Pillars of the World, but are only set up in the middle of a\ngreat banqueting-hall. A feast was being held in honour of Dagon, the\nFish-god; the sun was in the sign of the Waterman; Samson, the Sun-god,\ndied.[829]\n\n 6. SAMSON THE HEBREW SOLAR HERO = HERAKLES,\n MELKART.\n\nThe above comparison and interpretation of all Samson\u2019s deeds and the\nmanner of his end has yielded so clear and decided a result, that the\nanswer to the question, \u2018Who or what was Samson originally?\u2019 has\nnecessarily been already anticipated. I therefore now only combine\ntogether what has been discovered, and say: Samson was originally a\nSun-god, or his vicegerent a Solar hero\u2014the Sun being conceived as the\nrepresentative of the force of Heat in nature, whether vivifying and\nsalutary, or scorching and destructive.\n\nTo this result we are brought, finally, by the name of our hero. For\nSamson, or more accurately Shimsh\u00f4n, is an obvious derivative from the\nHebrew word for \u2018Sun.\u2019[830] As from d\u00e2g \u2018fish\u2019 D\u00e2g-\u00f4n,[831] the name of\nthe Fish-god of the Philistines, is formed, so from shemesh \u2018sun\u2019 we\nhave Shimsh-\u00f4n, the Sun-god.\n\nNow, to recur to Samson\u2019s hair, our thoughts turn most naturally to\nApollon\u2019s locks. But this comparison appears to me not quite accurate.\nFor Apollon\u2019s locks are connected with his arrows, and are, like them, a\nfigure of his rays. But Samson is not the shining god, but the warming\nand productive god. His hair, like the hair and beard of Zeus, Kronos,\nAristaeos, and Asklepios, is a figure of increase and luxuriant fulness.\nIn winter, when nature appears to have lost all strength, the god of\ngrowing young life has lost his hair. In the spring the hair grows\nagain, and nature returns to life again. Of this original conception the\nBiblical story still preserves a trace. Samson\u2019s hair, after being cut\noff, grows again, and his strength comes back with it.[832]\n\nThis Sun-god was, moreover, regarded as the beneficent power that\ndestroyed all powers and influences injurious to man and to life in\ngeneral,\u2014the chivalrous hero, who wandered over the earth from the east\nto the furthest west, everywhere ready to strike a blow to deliver the\nearth from the creatures of Typhon, the Hydra, etc., the defender and\nking of cities, leader of emigrants and protector of colonies\u2014in short,\nas _Herakles_.\n\nThis character of the Herakles-Melkart of the Phenicians appears in\nSamson in greatly shrunken proportions. The Hebrews sent no colonies to\nMount Atlas; the supernatural monsters become a natural lion; and\nSamson\u2019s strength was required only against the Philistines. It is also\nseen, moreover, from the above comparison, not only that it is correct,\nbut also how far it is correct, to call Samson the Hebrew Herakles. The\none as well as the other is a martial Sun-god. And this makes it clear\nalso that we are equally justified in classing Samson with Perseus and\nBellerophon, with Indra and Siegfried,\u2014in short, with all the\nmythological beings and legendary heroes whose nature is related to sun,\nlight, and especially warmth, like Orion, Seirios, Aristaeos, and\nKronos. In mythology, as in language, there are synonyms; e.g. Apollon\nand Helios, Herakles and Perseus; indeed, the two latter are both\nsynonymous with Apollon. Now two words belonging to different languages,\nthough similar in meaning, still scarcely ever call up absolutely the\nsame conception, but are a little different from one another as\nsynonyms. So also mythological beings and names in two nations,\nespecially where the difference is so great as it is between the Hebrews\nand the Greeks, and between the Semites and the Aryans in general, are\nprobably never perfectly identical, but never more than synonyms.\nTherefore we must not indulge the caprice of trying to make Samson as\nsimilar as possible to Herakles: for instance, there is not the\nslightest reason to assign to Samson twelve labours, and the less so as\nthat number even in the case of Herakles is only derived from a late age\nand forms too contracted a sphere. And, on the other hand, in finding\nanalogies to Samson, we are nowise compelled to rest satisfied with\nHerakles. But now we must look closer into Samson\u2019s birth and the\nposition ascribed to him in the Biblical narrative.\n\n 7. SAMSON'S BIRTH AND NAZIRITISM.\n\nThe birth of the hero of a legend is always the last circumstance to be\ninvented concerning him, when his life and character are already\nsettled; just as an author writes his preface only after the completion\nof his book. This comparison is here particularly apposite, since the\nnarrative of the appearance of the angel who announces to the parents of\nSamson after a long period of childlessness, the birth of a son who is\nto be dedicated to God,[833] is not invented by popular imagination, but\nproduced by the writer.\n\nThis introduction to the history of Samson is capable of two\ncomparisons. It may be put side by side with the birth of Samuel,[834]\nor with the law of Naziritism.[835] In either case several differences\nappear. Samuel is not described by the Biblical narrator as a Nazirite\n(n\u00e2z\u00eer). But from this it does not follow that at the time of the\ncomposition of the Book of Samuel this word had not yet come into use,\nbut only that in the signification which it then had, it did not seem\nappropriate to Samuel as he was then fancied. Samuel was called one Lent\nto God.[836] In consequence of this, he lived in the Tabernacle, waiting\non the High Priest and Judge Eli; he wore a priest\u2019s dress, and, as is\nstated with great emphasis, no razor came upon his head.[837] The latter\nis said of Samson also. The expression \u2018Lent to God,\u2019 seems not to have\nbeen a technical word or fixed designation, but only an etymological\ninterpretation of the name Samuel. The life in the Tabernacle and the\npriest\u2019s dress were certainly not essential to the position of a\nNazirite any more than to that of a Prophet, and are also out of accord\nwith the narrative of Samuel\u2019s later life; they must be only a later\ninvention.\n\nThe narrative of Samuel\u2019s dedication is perfectly simple, concerned only\nwith universal human conditions and feelings, deeply and fervently\nreligious. Deeply troubled and vexed at her childlessness, the wife\nprays God for a son, vowing, if only her prayer be answered, to dedicate\nthe child to God for all the days of his life. With the impulse of true\npiety, after the fulfilment of her prayer, she performs a voluntary vow,\nto which she is compelled by no law. This story is older than that of\nSamson, who becomes a Nazirite, not in fulfilment of a vow, but by\nreason of a Divine command.\n\nThe term Nazirite is first found used by the prophet Amos,[838] who\ncouples together the Nazirite and the Prophet; but he makes no mention\nof the hair, only of the prohibition of wine. But it does not follow\nfrom this fact that in the time of Amos the Nazirite did employ the\nrazor on his head. Samson\u2019s parents received a command to dedicate their\nson: he was to be a Nazirite from his mother\u2019s womb to the day of his\ndeath. But to the prohibition to shave off the hair and to drink wine\nwas added a prohibition to eat anything unclean; this was a later\naddition. The written law on the subject was the latest and also the\nseverest and most fully developed; for it adds to the previous\nprohibitions another against defilement by dead bodies. On the other\nside, however, the Law knows nothing of any life-long Nazirites, who\nwere to live like Samuel all their days in the Temple before God; for,\nin the later view represented by the Law, only the Priest, the son of\nAaron, lived in the Temple; he was then the truly dedicated person, and\nwine was denied him not absolutely, but at the time of his service in\nthe Temple.[839] And the Law had no need expressly to forbid the\nNazirite to touch unclean food, since it was already forbidden to every\nIsraelite. But to defile himself by the touch of a corpse, even of that\nof his father or mother, brother or sister, was forbidden to the\nNazirite.[840]\n\nThus we discover three or four stages in the development of Naziritism\namong the Israelites, exhibited, (1) by the passage in the prophet Amos,\n(2) by the narrative of the birth of Samuel, (3) by that of the birth of\nSamson, and lastly, (4) by the Law. Before the time of Amos there were\nNazirites\u2014that is, as appears from their being classed next to Prophets,\npeople who by a voluntary resolve consecrated their lives to God and the\nestablishment of religion in the nation, and as a symbol of their\nresolve denied themselves the use of wine and did not cut their hair.\nThere might be many prophets living as Nazirites because such a mode of\nlife seemed to them appropriate to their intercourse with God. At the\ntime of the construction of the narrative of Samuel\u2019s birth the\nNazirite\u2019s abstinence was regarded as something intrinsically\nmeritorious, rewarded by the special favour of God. Hence arose the idea\nthat Samuel, a man whom tradition allowed to have possessed\nextraordinary greatness, had been a Nazirite, not only at a mature age,\nbut from his very birth, although tradition did not call him such, but\nrepresented him only as a Prophet and Judge. It was supposed that\nNaziritism from birth had qualified him for his subsequent greatness. At\nthe time when the narrator of the birth of Samson lived, this idea was\nprobably so firmly established, that God could be imagined to bestow his\nspecial favour on an individual only by means of Naziritism, which was\ndemanded at his very birth as a condition of that favour. Naziritism,\nwhich to Amos had been only a peculiar mode of working for the cause of\nthe religion and morality of the nation, was degraded by the above\nprocess into a personal mode of life which was thought to be especially\nwell-pleasing to God. And then any one could adopt it at any moment, and\nkeep it up for a certain time only, longer or shorter; and the Law then\nprescribed the conduct of such as took a vow to live as Nazirites for a\ncertain period.\n\nBut how does the author of this narrative of Samson\u2019s birth stand in\nrelation to the subsequent popular legends? and what do these legends\nknow of Samson\u2019s Naziritism? Little, not to say Nothing. The\ncontradiction cannot be obliterated, and seems to have been observed by\nthe narrator of the birth himself. He was the first who called Samson a\nNazirite. If even his mother was to observe abstinence during her\npregnancy, it seemed to follow as a matter of course that Samson himself\nas a Nazirite ought to pass his life in no less abstinence. But the\nlegends reported the fact to be the reverse. The narrator observed this.\nSo when Samson\u2019s father prayed earnestly that the angel who had appeared\nto his wife and given her a rule of conduct, might appear to him also\nand say how they should do unto the child, the angel gave no answer, but\nonly repeated the rule for the mother. Thus the narrator did not venture\nto allow a degree of abstinence to be prescribed for Samson, which in\nthe legends he never practised.\n\nThere is, however, one feature of the Nazirite which is known even to\nthe legends: the uncut hair. The legend knows for certain that Samson\u2019s\nhair is the seat of his strength. But in the legend the hair is not\nrepresented as a mere ideal sign of divine consecration, but as the real\nsource of strength. And therefore Samson, having trifled away his hair\nand thereby lost his strength, gets his strength back as soon as his\nhair has begun to grow again. Thus the loss of the hair is not in the\nlegend a symbol of a falling away from God, nor the weakness that\nattends it produced through being deserted by God; but the hair itself\nis the strength, and to cut it off is the same thing as to curtail the\nstrength, as we have already seen.\n\nThere must, at all events, have been a time in Israel when hair and\nfulness of physical energy formed one identical idea: it was the heathen\ntime. When the people had gained a knowledge of the true God, the old\nlegend had to be modified. Then the uncut hair was treated as a\nconsecration of its possessor to the service of Jahveh. But the\nmodification was not fully carried out: one heathen feature remained\nunaltered\u2014the idea that with the growth of Samson\u2019s hair his strength\nalso grew up again.\n\n 8. GENERAL CHARACTER OF SAMSON, THE HEBREW HERO.\n\nThe very distinctness and clearness with which it has been found\npossible to invest the conception and interpretation of Samson as a hero\nof heathen mythology, proves the justice and certainty of such an\ninterpretation. And the justice of the mythical conception of Samson\u2019s\ndeeds may be demonstrated also by another consideration. The difference\nbetween Samson\u2019s position and that of the other Judges makes it obvious\nenough that his history is mere legend through and through. All the\nother Judges, Barak, Gideon, Jephthah, fight at the head either of a\nlarge force or of a small and picked company: Samson always appears\nalone, and beats hundreds and thousands alone, and this too without\narms. If the other Judges receive Divine apparitions by which they are\nimpelled to action for the deliverance of their people, yet they act\nwith perfectly human forces and means, in human fashion: Samson acts\nwith supernatural force, and is a miracle from beginning to end. In\nspite of this, Samson\u2019s action is not only destitute of any proper\nresult, but also\u2014what is more significant and far worse\u2014devoid of even\nthe consciousness of any aim, devoid of plan or idea. He\u2014Samson the\nNazirite consecrated to God!\u2014looks for wives and mistresses among his\nown and his people\u2019s enemies.[841] He teases, irritates, injures his\nenemies, and kills many of them. But there appears nowhere the\nconsciousness of any mission which he had to fulfil for the good of his\nnative land against his enemies. He is inspired by no idea of Jahveh,\ndriven forward by no impatience of a shameful yoke. He is roused only by\npleasures of the senses and the caprice of insolence. Samson is utterly\nimmoral. He is exactly an old heathen god, and therefore immoral, like\nall idols. Idols must be so, for they are only personifications of the\nforces and occurrences of nature; now nature as such is indifferent\ntowards morality, and consequently, though not moral, still not immoral\neither; but when the mechanical force of nature is pictured as a person,\nand removed into the conditions of ethical life, it cannot but appear\nabsolutely immoral. This is what all heathendom does, that of Greece not\nexcepted.[842]\n\nIf, on the one hand, Samson wants all the qualities necessary to an\nhistorical hero, he is on the other, viewed from the esthetic point, a\nmost admirable phenomenon, quite unique in Hebrew literature. It is\nreally wonderful with what tact, and what firm and delicate esthetic\nfeeling, the gigantic, Herculean, Samson is delineated in the Hebrew\nlegend. His behaviour evinces nothing uncouth or vulgar, a fault from\nwhich even the Greek Herakles is not free. Herakles, though adored as a\ngod, has to put up with being scorned and derided for his greediness; he\nis a standing character in the Greek comedy, and a butt against which\nall jests are levelled. Samson, on the contrary, is himself the jester\nand scoffer, who adds the jest of insult to the injury he does his\nenemies. A native merriness encircles him; and in the very hour of\ndeath, at his self-prepared destruction, he maintains his humour, which\nhere assumes a sarcastic tone.\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe have now to take in hand two more considerations of a general\ncharacter, which will determine the true import of the preceding\ndetached ones and set them on a firm basis. We must first enquire: What\nmeans the above demonstrated accordance of the Hebrew legend with the\nlegends of other nations?\u2014what is to be inferred from it? The answer to\nthis will assign the cause of the accordance. And then the field for the\ndevelopment of the legend of Samson in the popular mind, and the\nconnexion of the legend with the progress of religions life in the\ncourse of centuries, must be more fully discussed.\n\n 9. THE MUTUAL RELATIONSHIP OF THE COMPARED LEGENDS.\n\nIn the preceding comparisons, I have in the first instance proved\nSamson\u2019s relationship to the Semitic Sun-gods. The Hebrews being Semites\nthemselves, and living in the midst of Semitic nations, there can be no\ndoubt that the similarity of the Story of Samson to those of the Semitic\nSun-god is founded on original identity. But, on the other hand, the\nHebrew form of the story exhibits sufficient peculiarity to negative the\nidea of its being simply borrowed from other Semitic nations. Samson is\nnot exactly the Tyrian Melkart, nor the Assyrian and Lydian Sandon, but\na peculiar modification of the conception which lies at the base of both\nof them. It is, moreover, quite inconceivable that myths and stories\nheard from strangers could yield materials for tales about a national\nhero such as Samson. If we knew the Semitic myths and stories more\ncompletely, there would probably be not a single feature in the story of\nSamson left without some mythical conception of the Semites\ncorresponding to it; yet every feature would have undergone a peculiar\nHebrew modification. In the absence of such knowledge, we were obliged\nto proceed to a comparison with Greek and Roman legends. Now how are we\nto understand the similarities discovered there?\n\nIn the abstract, three cases may be assumed as possible. First, there\nmay have been borrowing; and if so, we should probably be inclined\nwithout hesitation to assume that the Greeks borrowed from the\nPhenicians and the Semitic nations of Asia Minor. Secondly, there may\nhave existed an original similarity in certain mythical conceptions\nbetween Semites and Aryans, whether by reason of original historical\nunity, or because both races had, independently of one another, hit upon\nthe same conception. Then thirdly, a combination of borrowing and unity\nis conceivable, by which the Greeks regained by borrowing some element\nwhich had been lost out of their memory, or obtained by borrowing from\nstrangers an idea synonymous with a preexisting native one. Which of\nthese possibilities is the reality, cannot be decided all at once with\nreference to Herakles in general; but even after some result has been\nreached respecting that hero\u2019s personality, the above enquiry must be\ninstituted afresh concerning every one of his acts.\n\nNow as to the general aspect of Herakles, I think we have at the present\nday advanced far enough to be able summarily to reject as absurd the\nidea that the Greeks had borrowed him from the Phenicians. The hero\nexhibits so decidedly the character of the Aryan Sun-god and Solar hero,\nand moreover appears in so specifically Greek a form, that there can be\nno doubt but that in him we see the peculiar Greek modification of a\npossession held in common by all the Aryans.\n\nThe fact, however, of Herakles being originally Greek, does not exclude\nthe possibility that the Greeks, if they heard of a Semitic god whom\nthey believed to be their Herakles, might claim the deeds of the foreign\ngod as belonging to their own hero. This was a perfectly natural and\nsimple process in the mind, such as may occur now to any one of us.\nSuppose that some one tells us news of a certain person whom we think we\nknow, because we know a person of the same name and position living at\nthe same place; then we shall immediately attribute what is told us of\nthe stranger to the one known to us. Thus the Greeks could, and could\nnot but, ascribe unconsciously to their Herakles what were really\nSemitic stories of Solar heroes.\n\nAccordingly, it seems to me beyond doubt, that the Greeks borrowed the\nkilling of the lion from the Semitic god. For the Lion is a mythical\nsymbol that recurs among all Semitic nations, whereas he is scarcely\never, if ever, found in the original Aryan mythology. In the original\nseats of the Aryan races there can scarcely have been any lions.\nMoreover, it is only after the seventh century B.C. that Herakles was\nfigured with the lion\u2019s hide. His original arms were those of Apollon,\nthe bow and arrows.\n\nWe touch here on a characteristic distinction between the Semitic and\nthe Aryan Sun-god. The former kills a lion, the latter a dragon. The\nLion is a symbol of solar heat; the Dragon was originally a symbol of\nwinter, rain, mist, marshy vapours. The Semitic god has to combat\nchiefly with the burning sun, the Aryan with clouds. In India, no doubt,\nIndra does battle with the \u2018Scorcher,\u2019 \u2018the Drought\u2019 (_\u015bush\u1e47a_); but\nthis is surely a later, peculiarly Indian, accretion. On the other side,\nhowever, as we shall see further on, the Semites were not ignorant of\nthe Cloud-Dragon. The distinction just indicated, therefore, must be\nunderstood as meaning only that here the one, there the other, of the\ntwo characteristics is the more widely spread and important; or that the\none or the other is the more fully developed.\n\nWith this may be combined another interesting feature. The Semitic\nSun-god represents chiefly the procreative warmth and the scorching\nheat; the Aryan rather the illuminating light and the fire, which latter\nhowever, in connexion with the rain, is no doubt regarded as productive\nof fertility. The two races also appear in general to be similarly\ndistinguished: the Semite has greater heat, the Aryan more light; the\nformer is more passionate, the latter more sanguine. But this is not a\nsuitable place to follow out this train of thought.\n\nAs to the foxes with fire-brands, that feature is probably also\nborrowed. Among all the Aryan nations, it is only the Latins, as far as\nI know, with whom this feature assumes any prominence; and with them it\nappears only in the form of sport, derived from a legend already\nenfeebled, and scarcely at all in religious rites; for in the latter we\nfind the red dog with the same signification; and the dog also is\nSemitic. It is possible that the fox is also preserved in the Fox of\nTeumessos;[843] but the latter belongs to Boeotia, where much Phenician\ninfluence is visible.\n\nIf the adventure with the gates of Gaza is correctly interpreted above,\nthe corresponding descent of Herakles into the nether-world can still\nscarcely be regarded as borrowed. The interpretation of the adventure at\nGaza, however, is not certain enough to build any further theories upon,\nany more than the story of the ass\u2019s jawbone, which moreover is very\ndifferent from the boar\u2019s tusks.\n\n 10. THE DEVELOPMENT OF MYTHS AMONG THE ISRAELITES\n IN CONNEXION WITH THAT OF MONOTHEISM.\n\nWe have convinced ourselves that the mythical mode of looking at things\nindicates a distinct stage in the development of the intellectual life\nof nations. The substance, which is looked at in the myth, is very\nvarious, and by no means bound to a polytheistic system. Without\noffending the dignity of Monotheism, it must be affirmed that not only\nGenesis, but also the narrative portion of the other Books of Moses, of\nJoshua and Judges, and isolated passages in all other books of the Old\nand the New Testament, are mythical. The primeval history comprised in\nthe first ten chapters of Genesis, sublime above the cosmogonies and\ntheogonies of all other nations, contains also sublimer myths.\n\nBut these Israelite myths, in the form in which we have them now, are\nframed throughout on a monotheistic principle. This form is for the most\npart not the original one, but a conversion out of a polytheistic form.\nMy exposition of the legend of Samson might be considered to have\nsufficed to prove the existence of a primeval heathenism among the\nHebrews, which of course rested on a Semitic foundation. But this\nconclusion may be further confirmed by the following considerations.\n\nI believe myself justified _a priori_, i.e. by reflections of a general\nnature, in relying on the concession, that the notion of Revelation, in\nthe sense that at a definite point of time and by a special Divine\ncontrivance, Monotheism was taught to a whole nation, and immediately\nhanded down by them in the sharpest, fullest, and most elaborated\nantagonism to all heathen ideas, is philosophically untenable, since it\nis in accordance neither with psychology nor with history. This leads\ndirectly and necessarily to the assumption, that the Israelites freed\nthemselves gradually from their inherited Semitic heathenism, and passed\nover to a Monotheism which increased in purity with time.\n\nIn opposition to these ideas, some have very recently renewed the\nattempt to establish Monotheism as the belief of primeval mankind, from\nwhich the nations passed into Polytheism, either, as some assume,\nthrough a growing dulness of spirit (a Fall), or, as others think,\nthrough the very opposite process, a higher development of mind; whilst\nthe Israelites preserved the old original Monotheism, which is reckoned\nto their credit by the first, and to their blame by the latter,\ntheorists. It suffices here to remark that this primitive Monotheism is\nabsolutely incapable of proof from history, that at the outset it turns\nhistory upside down, and especially that it is conjoined to a very loose\nand mean notion of the nature of Monotheism. Moreover, the Semitic race\ndid not possess Monotheism as an inheritance from its birth.[844]\n\nNow if history is unable to prove Monotheism to have existed from the\nbeginning in the Semitic race, even the monotheistic literature of the\nIsraelites contains evidence on the other side, exhibiting a mythical\nPolytheism that extended from high antiquity down into those writings.\nFor this Polytheism, as was natural, impressed on the language a stamp\nso distinct as to be still recognisable in various views and phrases\nbelonging to the Prophets and sacred poets.\n\nI will begin with the Book of Job. We need not here discuss the age of\nthe composition of this wonderful poem. No one will now think of placing\nit before Solomon\u2019s time; and Schlottmann\u2019s view, that it was produced\nat the end of Solomon\u2019s reign or under his successor, has probably but\nfew adherents. Now in this poem occur many personifications, which,\nalthough mainly based on lively poetical views and forming simply the\npoet\u2019s language, often also betray the existence of decidedly mythical\npersons. Although the author was undoubtedly a monotheist and a\nJahveist, yet in his ideas of the world heathenism was still not far\nremoved from him. This appears precisely in the passages in which he\ntries to portray the omnipotence of Jahveh; for there he sometimes slips\ninto expressions which look as if intended to picture the power of Indra\nand Zeus or Apollon. So e.g. (XXVI. 11\u201313): \u2018The pillars of heaven\ntremble, and are frightened at his rebuke; by his strength he shakes the\nsea, and by his wisdom he crushes Rahabh; by his breath he brightens the\nheaven, his hand pierces the flying Dragon.\u2019 To understand these words\nin the poet\u2019s own sense, I think we must make very delicate\ndistinctions. He appears to me to occupy a position in the middle\nbetween the pure Heathenism of a Vedic bard, and Prophetism, and no\ndoubt nearer to the latter than to the former; yet a position from which\nthe myth still almost looked like a myth, and was not a mere poetic\nfigure. I must explain my meaning more fully.\n\nEwald\u2019s view, that Rahabh was originally a name of Egypt, and then\nbecame the mythological designation of a sea-monster, is an exact\ninversion of the fact, and requires no refutation\u2014especially as it has\nbeen already answered.[845] _Rahabh_, etymologically denoting the Noisy,\nDefiant, was originally the name and description of the Storm-Dragon. In\nthe storm it was believed that Jahveh was fighting with a monster that\nthreatened to devour the sun and the light of the sky. I should claim\nthis well-known myth of Indra for the Semitic race, were it supported\nonly by the above verses, and should consequently regard it as a\nprimeval feature of the mythical aspect of nature, common to Semites and\nAryans, even if we were not so fortunate as we are, through Tuch\u2019s and\nOsiander\u2019s investigations, in finding the same myth repeated among the\nArabs and Edomites, who have the divine person \u1e32uza\u1e25, a Cloud-god, who\nshoots arrows from his bow.[846] Here it is clear at the same time that\nthe Bow is the Rainbow, and the Arrow the Lightning.[847] I see no\nreason for the supposition that the Storm-monster was fettered to the\nsky. But I think we may gather from Is. XXVII. 1, that the Semitic\nStorm-Dragon[848] was imagined in three forms: coiled up (\u02bfa\u1e33all\u00e2th\u00f4n),\ni.e. the Cloud; flying (b\u00e2r\u00eeach), i.e. the Lightning, or the dragon\nflying from the lightning, and lastly stretching himself, extended\n(Tann\u00een), i.e. streaming Rain. By the downpour of the rain the sea in\nheaven produced a sea on earth, and the tann\u00een was removed from the sky\ninto the ocean. As a sea-serpent he is called Rahabh, the Noisy.\n\nOf this nothing was known even to Isaiah, and no later Prophet or\nPsalmist understood this mythical view; these names of mythical beings\nhad been imperceptibly converted into names of hostile nations, having\nbeen probably first used to designate great and notorious beasts living\nin the territories of the nations. Thus in Ps. LXXXVII. 4, Rahabh\nindisputably stands for Egypt; and two passages in Ezekiel (XXIX. 3, and\nXXXII. 2), exhibit clearly the supposed transition, since Pharaoh, that\nis Egypt, is in the latter compared to the Tann\u00een, that is the\nCrocodile, and in the former actually addressed as such. Thus the Tann\u00een\nor Rahabh became first any kind of sea-monster, then specially the\ncrocodile, and finally Egypt. Similarly it is said in Ps. LXVIII. 31\n[30], \u2018Rebuke the beast of the sedge,\u2019[849] i.e., the crocodile, meaning\nEgypt.\n\nBut there is a general connexion between this dragging down of mythical\nbeings into the life on earth and the conversion of mythical actions in\nheaven into terrestrial history. Passages are not wanting in which a\nwavering between the mythic signification and that of legendary history,\nor the absorption of the former in the latter, is evident. Thus it is\nsaid in Ps. LXXXIX. 10\u201312 [9\u201311], \u2018Thou rulest the pride (elevation) of\nthe sea; when it raises its waves, thou stillest them; thou treadest\nunder foot Rahabh as one that is slain; with the arm of thy might thou\nscatterest thy enemies. Thine is the heaven, thine also the earth, etc.\u2019\nHere the parallel to Rahabh in the preceding member is g\u00ea\u02be\u00fbth\n\u2018elevation, pride, defiance,\u2019 and in the succeeding one \u2018thy enemies.\u2019\nThe writer\u2019s general attention is directed to physical phenomena, which\nyielded to him the old heathen conception of Rahabh; but Rahabh had\nalready gained a historical signification, and consequently suggested in\nthe following member an historical reference.\n\nThis appears still more beautifully, and in a way which lays open to us\nthe origin of the legendary history, in the following passage, Ps.\nLXXIV. 12\u201317: \u2018But God my king, from the olden time working deliverances\nin the middle of the earth. Thou cleavest with thy might the sea,\nbreakest the heads of the Tann\u00eens over the water. Thou crushest the\nheads of Livy\u00e2th\u00e2n, givest him for food to beasts of the desert. Thou\nsplittest open (i.e. makest to burst forth) spring and stream; thou\ndriest mighty rivers. Thine is the day, thine also the night, thou hast\nappointed light and sun. Thou settest all the borders of the earth;\nsummer and winter, thou formest them.\u2019 Here, again, we have a picture of\nthe natural world, and one taken from the mythical point of view. God\ncleaves the cloud with the lightning, and by that act kills the upper\nDragon above the water, so that the rivers of rain stream down out of\ncloud-rocks. But this mythical act, which is repeated for ever in every\nthunderstorm, had been converted first into a single act, performed once\nin ancient time (mi\u1e33\u1e33edem), and subsequently into a cleaving of the sea\nat the Exodus out of Egypt. It is this which the poet intends to depict\nin these six verses, which he probably took from an ancient song. Thus\nhe sings of Israel\u2019s passage through the sea and the desert in words\nwhich were intended to picture the Semitic Storm-myth; and thus we see\nhow the latter was transformed into the former. This transformation was\nfacilitated on the part of the language by the circumstances that in the\nverses just quoted the verbs may be understood as well as in a preterite\nas in a present sense (\u2018thou cleavest\u2019 or \u2018thou cleavedst\u2019), and that\n\u1e33edem denotes either \u2018past time, antiquity,\u2019 or \u2018the beginning of all\ntime.\u2019\n\nThe case is exactly the same with the Prophet, Is. LIX. 9, 10: \u2018Awake,\nawake, put on strength, O arm of Jahveh; awake, as in the days of the\nbeginning (\u1e33edem), in the generations of olden times (\u02bf\u00f4l\u00e2m\u00eem)! Is it\nnot thou that dost (or \u2018didst\u2019) cut Rahabh, that piercest (or\n\u2018piercedst\u2019) Tann\u00een? is it not thou that didst dry the sea, the water of\nthe great abyss, that didst make the depths of the sea a way for the\nransomed to pass over?\u2019 Here also it is clear how the Prophet\u2019s\nconsciousness passed imperceptibly from the myth into the legend, or, if\nyou prefer to call it so, history.\n\nFrom these passages it appears that the conversion of the legend into\nhistory was already so firmly fixed in the minds of men, that, when they\nbegan with depicting nature, and in so doing had recourse to the\nstereotyped expressions that originally had a mythical meaning, they\nwere involuntarily drawn into historical contemplation. This is not the\ncase with the writer of Job: he remains within the mythical\ncontemplation of nature. So full of life are the mythical pictures in\nhis writings that we must suppose them to have been to him more than a\nmere matter of constructive fancy. The Pillars of Heaven are not to him\nmere mountains poetically described, but also convey a full-toned echo\nof the Pillars of Hercules that supported the heaven.[850] The stars and\nconstellations are to him still actually living beings. In his work\nRahabh cannot signify Egypt, but is still really the Sea-serpent. It is\ntrue that in other passages of the Prophets and Psalms Jahveh walks over\nthe water of the clouds, which is by Habakkuk (III. 15), in a chapter\ncontaining many references to mythology, actually called \u2018Sea\u2019 (y\u00e2m):\nbut only the writer of Job still speaks of the \u2018heights of the\nsea,\u2019[851] which in mythology are the clouds; even Amos, one of the\nearliest Prophets, substitutes for it \u2018the heights of the earth\u2019 (IV.\n13). Isaiah mentions the \u2018heights of the clouds,\u2019[852] a decidedly\nmythical phrase; but the Prophet appears in that passage to have\nintentionally adopted heathen conceptions, as the words are put into a\nheathen mouth. Amos (V. 8) names the constellations Orion and the\nPleiades, but he knows only that Jahveh \u2018made\u2019 them; whereas the writer\nof Job (XXXVIII. 31) speaks of their fetters. From the speech which he\nputs into the mouth of Jahveh it may probably be inferred that he\nregarded the mythical acts as acts that took place at the Creation.\nThus, as I have already remarked, he takes a middle position between\npure myth as such and myth transformed into legendary history.\nAltogether, he never directs his attention to History and the revelation\nof God in history: to his mind God is only a wise creator and upholder\nof Nature, and within this nature lies Man, i.e. the individual whom God\ncreated thus, and whose destiny he determines in wisdom and grace. The\npoet of Job does not possess the world-embracing glance of the Prophet.\n\nStill, though in his mythology he stands nearer to heathenism than the\nProphets, and his mind falls short of the breadth and greatness of the\nprophetic soul, he may yet be a contemporary of theirs, only one who\nlived in a retired circle, and had, so to speak, a one-sided education.\nAnd his whole phraseology possesses a somewhat sensuous and\nmaterialistical character, which becomes strikingly obvious on the\ncomparison of certain expressions and certain passages expressing the\nsame thought. Orion is in Job still really the fettered Giant (Kes\u00eel\n\u2018the Strong,\u2019 not \u2018the Fool\u2019); but Isaiah (XIII. 10) forms from this\nword the plural kes\u00eel\u00eem, \u2018the bright-shining stars.\u2019 Then the word had\nceased to be a proper name, which it was still in Job. Similarly Tann\u00een\nis here a proper name; but later it denotes a great sea-animal in\ngeneral (e.g. in Ps. LXXIV. 13, quoted above), and therefore can have a\nplural. See also Is. XIX. 13, 14: \u2018The princes of Zoan are become fools,\nthe princes of Noph are deceived; the heads of her tribes have led Egypt\nastray. Jahveh pours into their midst a spirit of perverseness, and they\nlead Egypt astray in all her action, like a drunken man tumbling into\nhis vomit;\u2019 and compare with this Job XII. 24: \u2018[God] taketh away the\nheart of the chief of the people of the earth, and leads them astray in\na pathless waste; they grope in darkness without light, and he leads\nthem astray like a drunken man.\u2019 Here we have not, as in Isaiah, the\nabstract \u2018Spirit (r\u00fbach) of perverseness,\u2019 but the concrete \u2018Heart\u2019\n(l\u00eabh); and the \u2018Going astray\u2019 also is depicted more sensuously.[853]\n\nNow that we have thus learnt that the Storm-myth existed among the\nHebrews and the Semites in a form similar to that which it had among the\nAryans, to such an extent that it indelibly permeated their views of\nnature and their language, we have not only gained a greatly increased\njustification for regarding the story of Samson as a myth, but we can\nnow venture also on other mythological combinations and interpretations,\nwhich taken singly possess but little security and may pass for mere\nconjectures, but which almost certainly have a general mythic character.\nThus we may find in the Bible a copious source of knowledge of Semitic\nMythology. While only calling to memory in general terms the numerous\naccordances with Semitic mythology contained in the Bible, which Movers\nhas in many cases made quite certain, I will here select a few\nnarratives which seem to have a connexion with the above discussed\nStorm-myth.\n\nI have before[854] pointed to the fact that myths of a Sun-god are\nembodied in the life of Moses. Now all of these correspond to\nwide-spread Aryan myths of the Sun-god or Solar hero. Immediately after\nhis birth Moses is put into a chest and placed on the water. A similar\nfate befalls nearly all the Solar heroes: e.g. Perseus, and heroes of\nthe German legends. As Moses sees a burning bush which does not burn\naway, so the grove of Feronia[855] is in flames without burning away. I\nhave already shown[856] that the staff by which Moses performs his\nmiracles is the Pramantha. Like Moses, Dionysos strikes fountains of\nwine and water out of the rock.[857] Moses, by throwing a piece of wood\ninto bitter water makes it sweet (Ex. XV. 25). This must be the same as\nthe churning of the Am\u1e5bta, Soma, Nectar, the divine mead. Moses has no\ndragon to kill, but he kills an Egyptian, and immediately flies, like\nall Solar heroes;[858] and like Apollon, Herakles and Siegfried, he\nbecomes a servant. And the sea, over which Moses stretches out his hand\nwith the staff, and which he divides, so that the waters stand up on\neither side like walls while he passes through, must surely have been\noriginally the Sea of Clouds;[859] and I have consequently little\ninclination to look for the spot of the earth where, and the conditions\nunder which, the passage might have taken place. A German story presents\na perfectly similar feature.[860] The conception of the Cloud as sea,\nrock and wall, recurs very frequently in mythology. Moses feeds the\nIsraelites with quails. By means of a quail Iolaos wakes the dead\nMelkart from death. And the quail appears to have had a close connexion\nwith Apollon and Diana; for \u1f48\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03af\u03b1 is an old name of Delos, the island\nof Apollon; and the nurse of Apollon and Diana, and even Diana herself,\nare called by the same name. Moses causes manna, sweet as honey, to be\nrained down with the dew; this again reminds us of the nectar and the\nmead of the gods.\n\nThus we see that almost all the acts of Moses correspond to those of the\nSun-gods. We have here not only similar mythical features, but features\nwhich in both cases unite to form one and the same cycle.\n\nThe Book of Judges, as well as the Books of Moses, exhibits ancient\nelements preserved from the heathen times, also in conformity with Aryan\nmyths. So Shamgar (Judges III. 31), who slew six hundred Philistines\nwith an ox-goad, is only Samson in another form. And his name points to\nthe Sun-god; for it seems to me to denote \u2018He that circles about in the\nsky.\u2019 We must pay attention to the fact that Barak denotes \u2018Lightning,\u2019\neven though Barcas is a Carthaginian name. With Barak is associated\nDeborah, the \u2018Bee.\u2019 Now if rain and dew are treated as Honey, then the\nBee must stand for the rain-cloud. A third name occurs in this\nconnexion\u2014Jael (Y\u00e2\u02bfel), the \u2018Wild Goat,\u2019 which is also a symbol of the\nCloud. The Melissae (bees) and the goat Amalthea among the Greeks take\neach others\u2019 places. Lastly, the manner in which Sisera is killed, by a\nhammer and nail, reminds one of the God of Lightning. The mode in which\nDavid kills Goliath reminds us of Thor\u2019s battle with Hrungnir, in which\nhe throws his hammer into Hrungnir\u2019s forehead.\n\nThe germ of these various agreements ought in fact probably to be\nreferred to an original identity in the mythical views of the Semites\nand Aryans, who were not separated till later. The Fire and (connected\ntherewith) the Sun, and then the Storm also, may well have led to the\nformation of the same myths by the two races while they still lived\ntogether. The separation of the races then produced distinct\ndevelopments out of the common germ, which developments, however,\nnaturally had many points of agreement.\n\n 11. ANALOGY WITH OLD HEATHEN ELEMENTS IN THE\n POPULAR IDEAS OF THE LATER AGE.\n\nIt results from the preceding historical investigation that the oldest\nHebrews were heathens, and that elements belonging to heathen mythology\nare even present in the Bible. To gain a clearer idea of the nature of\nthis fact, I will refer to a precisely similar case\u2014the relation of our\nage to the old German heathen times.\n\nThe Germans had originally gods, worship, myths and legends\u2014in short, a\nheathen faith, of their own. But for more than a thousand years all the\nGerman tribes have been Christian. Nevertheless, heathen practices still\nsurvive among them everywhere and in most various forms; and are so\nclosely interwoven with Christian practices as to be almost\nineradicable. I will only select a few instances. The old German gods\nstill live in the names of the days of the week.[861] Churches and\nconvents were founded at places which had been heathen sanctuaries;\nChristian feasts were fixed on days sacred to heathen deities, and thus\nthe heathen name \u2018Easter\u2019 has maintained its existence as a designation\nfor the highest Christian feast. Heathenism is preserved chiefly in the\npopular legends both of the hills and of the lowlands, in popular\ncustoms, usages, games and superstitions; all which has been lately\ncollected in special books and periodicals. Kuhn\u2019s collections made in\nNorth Germany and Westphalia are of especial scientific value. The gods,\nhowever, have been converted into devils and monsters, the goddesses\ninto night-hags and witches. But religious stories, Christian legends,\nare also often utterly heathen; there are deeds and occurrences\nbelonging to gods and heroes, which are attributed to the Saints and to\nChrist himself. Thus the killing of the Dragon, which is known as a myth\nto all the Aryan nations, is ascribed to Saint George. The office of the\ngod Thor, who pursued and bound giants, is filled in Christian Norway by\nSaint Olave. Christ and Saint Peter wander about unrecognised in human\nform, to reward virtue and punish vice, as the heathen gods did before\nthem. Mary, especially, had a multitude of lovely and charming features\nascribed to her, which under heathenism were attributes of Freyja,\nHolda, and Bertha. A great number of flowers, plants and insects, the\nolder names of which referred to Freyja and Venus, are called after\nMary, e.g. Maiden-hair (i.e. the Virgin Mary\u2019s hair), otherwise Capillus\nVeneris;[862] and Holda who sends snow becomes Mary: Notre Dame aux\nneiges, Maria ad nives. In short, \u2018now Christian substance appears\ndisguised in a heathen form, now heathen substance in Christian form,\u2019\nas Jacob Grimm says, in whose _Deutsche Mythologie_ the reader will find\nmuch relating to this mixture of old heathen and Christian ideas in the\nspirit of the \u2018simple folk that have a craving for myths.\u2019\n\nWith the Hebrews it must have been much the same as with the Germans. We\nknow that no less time than the entire period from Moses to Ezra\u2014a\nthousand years of all manner of struggles and of the exercise of the\ngreatest intellectual and moral forces\u2014was requisite to develop the\nfaith in One God, and make it a common and permanent possession of the\npeople, pervading the whole spiritual consciousness.\n\nBut the fact that the Germans\u2019 monotheism was brought to them from\noutside, while that of the Israelites sprang up among themselves, must\nsurely have been favourable to the preservation of heathen\ncharacteristics among the latter. Whilst in Germany a systematised\nChristianity, fully conscious of the issues involved, contended against\nHeathendom; among the Hebrews, Monotheism unfolded all its inevitable\nconsequences only by degrees, gradually gaining a knowledge both of\nitself and of the antagonism in which it was implicated towards all\nphases of the heathen faith, worship and life. The Germans knew that\ntheir ancestors were heathens; they endeavoured as far as possible to\nbreak with their heathen past; and yet, knowingly or unknowingly, they\nretained a great deal of heathenism; and the pride of the Old German\npopular poetry, the _Nibelungen_, has a primeval myth for its subject.\nBut the contrast between the heathen and the modern age was not at all\nfirmly fixed in the mind of the Israelites, precisely because the\ntransition was gradual. Only exceptionally do we find any reminiscence\nof the old heathenism, which is put back into the most ancient times. As\nfar as the people were able to trace their history backwards, that is,\nto their supposed ancestor Abraham, they put back the faith in Jahveh;\nor indeed still farther, to Adam. The only true God Jahveh was soon\ntreated as the only one worshiped in the beginning, from whom mankind\nfell away, intentionally defying him. Abraham alone remained faithful,\nand therefore Jahveh elected Abraham\u2019s descendants to be his people.\nThus the Israelite fancied the faith in Jahveh to be the primitive and\ninalienable possession of his people, which had been only temporarily\nweakened, but never really lost. Even to other nations the knowledge of\nJahveh could never be wanting; for they worshiped false, non-existent,\ngods from folly and malice, and the Israelite took for granted that they\nmust know all that he knew. Now if even the Christian of the middle\nages, although he knew that his ancestors were heathen, nevertheless\noften described them as acting like Christians, because he had no\nknowledge of heathendom, and no power of imagining a past age, except in\nthe likeness of his own; how much more would the monotheistic Israelite\npicture his past ages, in which he acknowledged no heathenism at all, in\na Jahveistic light? His whole history was unconsciously transformed. The\nheathen myths, which must have something in them, else they could not be\ntold at all, were converted into events of the earth, closely coalescing\nwith historical facts, what the heathen gods were said to have done was\nascribed to Jahveh himself or one of his human ministers. The old\nSemitic gods, if not utterly forgotten, were made by the Hebrew into men\nof the primeval age, powerful heroes, or Patriarchs. I can invoke the\nauthority of Ewald and Bunsen, for the assertion that no Biblical name\nbefore Abraham has any historical significance, and that of Movers for\nsaying that Abraham is only the ancient national god of the Semites, El,\nwho was also their first king or their ancestor, and that Israel,\nAbraham\u2019s grandson, was the Semitic Herakles Palaemon. The Israelite\nknew no longer how his forerunners had lived and thought in those ages,\nwhile they were still heathen; and he flooded his past history with the\nlight which shone for him, but was of recent origin. He unconsciously\nfalsified the facts of the history, because he did not care particularly\nfor facts. Everything heathen received a Jahveistic sense, the heathen\nform a Jahveistic significance, the heathen substance a Jahveistic form.\nOnly under these conditions could the past history of Israel be made\nintelligible to the mind of the people.\n\nAnd then, when priests and prophets came to reduce the popular stories\nto writing, they could certainly only complete what the populace had\nalready begun. They also were not historians or investigators at all;\ninstead of transporting themselves into a past age, they raised the past\nage to the light of the present. No doubt they were more consistent and\nmore inventive than the populace; for they wrote with an intelligence\nwhich marks and attempts to explain inconsistencies; and even in the\ninterest of a certain political or religious object. The heathenism,\nwhich they could not understand, seemed to them impossible; they\ndiscovered everywhere at least Jahveistic motives.\n\nThus, I think, the Biblical narrative of Samson was an old heathen\nstory, transformed by a Jahveistic colouring, given to it first by the\nIsraelitish populace, and subsequently by the author of the narrative. I\nhave endeavoured, by the aid of parallel instances, to trace the mode of\nthis transformation and to recover the original form and meaning of the\nold story.\n\n 12. GENERAL PSYCHOLOGICAL REFLECTION.\n\nWe must now attempt to realise the psychological relations and processes\nupon which is based the preservation and transformation of heathen ideas\nwithin the range of Monotheism, the fact of which has been exhibited\nabove.\n\nWe require here to see clearly, at least in broad outline, what\nrelations ideas of recent growth, especially on religion and morals,\nbear to older representations. For from this it will then be easy to\nmake the application to the special case before us, the relation of the\nmonotheistic Jahveistic ideas to the older heathen representations among\nthe Israelites. The story of Samson will then present only a special\ninstance of this relation.\n\nAmong the ideas and thoughts, either of a nation or of an individual, a\ncertain harmony prevails, which is in its nature not logical but\npsychological, not based on the law of Contradiction, but yielding that\nlaw as a specially rigorous result; in itself, however, much broader and\nmore delicate, and indeed through its very breadth losing in stringency.\nThe laws of logic have a double basis, a metaphysical one on the\nobjective side, and a psychological on the subjective. That is, the\nlogical law must be observed, because, if it be not, there arises, on\nthe one hand, a disturbance of the metaphysical relation under which\nthings in their reality have to come into thought, and on the other, an\ninsoluble problem for our psychological function of Consciousness. Of\ncourse, in logical error or offence against logical law, so far as it\nactually occurs, there is nothing psychologically impossible. For\nexample, a logically improper association of two ideas in the mind is\npossible\u2014but only through the absence from the mind of the third factor,\nwhich logically makes it an error: if it were present, it would\ninfallibly have prevented the improper association. That which is\nlogically wrong is thus incapable of being thought. No one can think\nthat 7 + 4 = 12. We may certainly make such a false reckoning, if we\nhappen not completely to spread before us the contents of the numbers in\nthis succession: then such an association of ideas, such a summation of\nthe series, may be formed. But as soon as the set of numbers is fully\ncounted out, our passage from 7 + 4 to 12 is stopped, and no effort\nwould avail to connect them as equals. That which in the logical sphere\nis \u2018right\u2019 or \u2018wrong\u2019 takes, in the psychological, the form of\n\u2018complete\u2019 or \u2018incomplete.\u2019 Accordingly, if without knowing logic men\ncan think right, and tell right thinking from wrong, it is because, when\nonce the elements of a case are all clearly present to the mind, wrong\nthinking is psychologically impossible. This impossibility in the first\ninstance only forces us to drop the wrong combination; but this is the\nfirst inducement to search for the right one. But, supposing no free\nmovement of search and a total absence of reflection, then we shall\nsimply have such range of combination as may be compatible with the\npsychological conditions; and, provided the necessary factors are all\nclear in the mind, this can be no other than the right one, viz., that\nwhich accords with the aggregate view of things.\n\nThis congruity among the ideas of particular nations or individuals is\nno doubt tantamount in the end to an avoidance of logical contradiction;\nand into this we might in all cases resolve such concord, could we\nexactly trace all the threads or intermediate members. But where the\nmost we can do is to _feel_ such threads of connexion, the congruity\ntakes the shape of some Characteristic pervading the circles of\nideas\u2014some common stamp.\n\nAccording to this, we ought to be able to discover in the mind of every\nnation a system of ideas intrinsically bound together and never\nself-contradictory. And this will so far prove to be the fact, that a\ncertain national type will be everywhere present. But it is possible for\ncontradictions to occur in the national life; for, if only they do not\nclash against one another in the consciousness, the contradictory ideas\ndo not operate with their force of contradiction. Even every individual\ndoubtless bears about with him unconsciously many ideas in harshest\ncontradiction; contradictions, however, they are, in virtue not of any\nobjective force proper to the ideas in themselves, but of an act of\njudgment which sets them forth as mutually contradictory. The\ncontradictions are often hidden very deep, and only brought to light by\na methodical search. When, however, new ideas, proclaimed everywhere in\nthe streets, conflict with the old ones, the contradiction is at once\nbrought to the light of day. What will be the result?\n\nA conflict will arise, without doubt: will it be one with physical\nweapons? Such a conflict, though it may be inevitable, and though it has\noften given occasion for the exhibition of high and noble virtue, is\nnevertheless of no value to the real cause, the true victory, the\nvictory of truth; and the chief point gained by the physical victory has\ngenerally been only the conviction of its worthlessness.\n\nThe conflict within the mind, where Ideas _en masse_ confront Ideas in\nrank and file,\u2014this forms the substance of the History of Mankind: a\nConflict of Souls.\n\nMind rules and moulds, Matter is ruled and moulded: this relation\nrepeats itself within the consciousness. Whatever consciousness owes to\nimpressions of sense, serves as material to be moulded by mental\nactivity. For the purpose of this moulding, the mind, impelled partly by\nthis material itself and partly by its own nature, forms\nrepresentations, notions, forms i.e. modes of apprehension, and ideas,\nnamely, the general conceptions of genera and species, the metaphysical\ncategories, and the moral ideas. In accordance with the moral ideas are\nformed principles of action, judgments on the acts of others, even of\nGod, insofar as man believes himself acquainted with the acts of God.\nConversely, acts are declared to be or not to be God\u2019s, insofar as they\ndo or do not accord with the moral standard and the conception of God.\nIn accordance with the general class-conceptions the world of things\ndivides itself before the view: and while by certain esthetic and moral\nideas these things are brought under a rule of valuation, in\nmetaphysical aspects they are put into a causal relation. Finally,\nreligious ideas form the foundation and the summit of all these curious\nconstructions of a world and judgments passed on a world.\n\nAccordingly, the conflict shows itself in two forms. Sometimes a certain\ndomain of materials, in which new relations and connexions have become\nprominent, requires a new form of thought to dominate it; sometimes a\nnew form of thought strives to supplant the old one, and to reshape, in\naccordance with its new laws, the matter which had been shaped by the\nformer one. An example will make this clear. The thought \u2018God\u2019 forms the\napex of the pyramid of ideas; it possesses the highest and widest\ndominion\u2014for this very reason unfortunately often the weakest\u2014and\ntherefore shapes every province of consciousness in accordance with what\nit contains. Now, let an altered character come over the contents of one\nof these domains, say of the ideas concerning our relation to our\nfellow-men, or concerning causality in nature; then that domain can no\nlonger tolerate to be ruled and moulded by the thought previously\nconnoted in the word \u2018God,\u2019 standing as it now does in contradiction to\nthat thought. It sets up the sway of a new form of thought, which fits\nits new contents, because growing out of them; there arises a new\nconception of God, a new Theology. But the old Theology has still its\nseat in all the other provinces of consciousness; so that, before any\nfurther advance, the new Idea has still to bring all these other\nprovinces under its sway, to dissolve the shape given them by the old\nprinciple, and replace it by one which is congenial with itself. This\nmay, nay must, produce a long conflict, which demands much labour. Of\nmany a concept the intension will have to be entirely cancelled,\u2014of all\nto be at least remodelled. Yet with many ideas the association has\nthrough long habit become quite fixed. Severed they must be, the new God\nrequires it; but it can only be done very gradually. A thousand\nforbidden combinations find lurking-places and remain; they maintain\nthemselves in contradiction to the new order of things, and perhaps half\naccommodate themselves to it in order to avoid a shock.\n\nImperfectly as I have expounded the point in question, I hope,\nnevertheless, that what I have said will suffice for the present\npurpose. What it wants in transparency and clearness may yet be added by\nthe application of the general remarks to the particular case.\n\nThere existed for a long time, as I have remarked, monotheistic and\nheathen ideas in the national mind of the Israelites side by side\u2014the\nformer being the newer, the latter the older. But yet the former were\nthe ruling ideas, and always gaining strength and clearness and coming\nto the brightest foreground of the consciousness, whereas the latter\nwere constantly losing ground and clearness. Thus the nation lost the\ntrue consciousness of its heathen past history and the understanding of\nits former condition and experiences. For no nation as such possesses\nthat true sense for history, by which it would conceive of itself and\nits present existence in conscious contrast to the past, and strive to\ngain an objective view of the mind and nature of past ages. The\nconsciousness of a nation is only the active present age, and knows\nnothing of history. Therefore, whenever a radical revolution, extending\nover many important domains of ideas, has come over the nation, it no\nlonger understands its own past history which lies on the other side of\nthe revolution. Yet the old words, sayings and stories are transmitted\nall the same, and they contain accounts of bygone events and conditions,\nancient ideas and ancient faith. But the stories which refer to obsolete\nand forgotten states of things are unintelligible; the names and sayings\nof forgotten gods, things and ideas are empty; typical figures and\nphrases based on those legends and gods, though still living on the\nlips, have become senseless. The nation always thinks that the word must\nhave an idea behind it. So what it does not understand, it converts into\nwhat it does; it transforms the word until it can understand it. Thus\nwords and names have their forms altered: e.g. the French _\u00e9crevisse_\nbecomes in English _crawfish_, and the heathen god _Svantevit_ was\nchanged by the Christian Slavs into _Saint Vitus_, and the Parisians\nconverted _Mons Martis_ into _Montmartre_. And what was reported of\npersons or beings represented like persons, that are no longer known, is\nnow told of persons whose acquaintance has been newly made. In Germany\nit was told of the god Wuotan, that he was called Long-beard, and as\nsuch fell asleep inside a mountain; now when Wuotan was utterly\nforgotten, a new subject had to be found; and the legend was transferred\nto the heroic kings Charles [the Great] and Frederick [Barbarossa].\nMoreover, the myth that forms the groundwork of the poem of the\n_Nibelungen_, which was originally told without mention of any definite\ntime or place, was assigned to a well-known locality, and its heroes\nreceived the names of historical kings.\n\nEvery nation must of necessity act similarly; for the legends which it\ntells must be its own legends, and reflect its own life and present\ncircumstances; if they have ceased to do so because its life has\nchanged, then they are changed in accordance with the change in the\nlife. Even the future beyond the grave is to the popular mind only the\npresent life somewhat gilded; then how is it likely that the past shall\nbe thought of as different from the present?\n\nAnd precisely because these transformations and transferences are\nnecessary, they take place unconsciously and unintentionally. The mind\nof the nation does not make them; they are an occurrence in that mind,\nwhich makes itself by itself. The nation has subjects and predicates,\nsounds and meanings, given to it in the legend. Now if the stream of\ntime carries off the subjects and meanings into the ocean of oblivion,\nthen by the psychological law the unattached predicates and sounds must\nfasten themselves on to any other subjects and meanings by which they\ncan be supported. This takes place without any one intending it, and\nwithout any one observing it.\n\nThe words, names and phrases which a nation uses have to be apperceived\nin the moment when they are employed. This is true both of the hearer\nand of the speaker. But the apperceptions are dependent on the\npreviously formed associations of ideas. Now if a German heard\n\u2018Sinfluth,\u2019 or if, when speaking, this word known to him by tradition\npresented itself to his consciousness in the course of speech, then the\nsecond part of the word, _Fluth_ \u2018flood,\u2019 found the idea with which it\nwas associated, and which was reproduced by being brought into\nconsciousness by the word; but the first part, _Sin_, stood in no\nassociation and roused no idea. But by material relationship and partial\nidentity of sound, _Sin_ is associated with _S\u00fcnde_ \u2018sin,\u2019 and the\nlatter idea (that of sin or guilt) was at the same time associated with\nthe word _Sinfluth_ as a whole; thus then this idea of sinfulness was\nstrongly lifted into prominence on two sides, much more strongly and\nquickly than the German _Sin_ itself. This latter was ultimately raised\ninto prominence only through its traditional combination with _Fluth_\n\u2018flood,\u2019 and this only as a sound; consequently in its advance it was\novertaken by _S\u00fcnde_ \u2018sin,\u2019 which was lifted into prominence partly\nthrough it (_Sin_), and partly also through _Fluth_, and therefore with\ndouble force. Consequently people spoke and thought _S\u00fcnd_, instead of\nsaying without thinking _Sin_; and this was the direct result of a\nsimple psychological process.[863] Similarly in all analogous cases.\nAmong the Ossetes of the Caucasus the Dies Martis, Tuesday, is\nunconsciously converted into George\u2019s Day; and the Dies Veneris, Friday,\ninto Mary\u2019s Day. In many nations the gods form a circle limited to\ntwelve immortals; the thirteenth in a society was then a mortal, one\ndestined to die. Similarly, even at the present day, Christians fear\nthat out of thirteen one will die, referring it however to the company\nof thirteen formed by Jesus and the twelve Apostles. Again, there was a\nlegend widely spread among Teutonic nations, of an Archer, who shot an\napple from his own little boy\u2019s head, and answered the despot at whose\ncommand he had done it, when asked about his other two arrows, that they\nwere intended for him, in case the first had killed the child. Who was\nthe Archer? Who was the Despot? where and what was the motive? All this\nwas forgotten; there only remained a dim echo of the legend of the shot.\nBut when Switzerland, a nation of archers, had shaken off the yoke of a\ndespot, all the features of the story recovered definite names, places,\ntime, and motive. As the stone flying through the air falls to the earth\nby the law of attraction, so the old legend fell into the\nLiberation-time.\n\nSometimes we forget something, but yet retain a small part of it in the\nmemory, as when we say, I have really forgotten his name; but I am sure\nit begins with B. The same thing happens to nations. The name of Venus,\nor Holda, was forgotten; but people were sure that she was a divine\nwoman. Now to the Christians of the middle ages \u2018Divine Woman\u2019 and\n\u2018Mary\u2019 were one single idea; consequently, the name Mary, unobserved,\ntook the place of the heathen goddesses in the numerous appellations and\nlegends which are now connected with Mary. Of Mars it was only\nremembered that he was a warrior; so Tuesday, which was sacred to him,\ncould only become Saint George\u2019s Day.\n\nSimilar was the history of the Israelites when they became monotheistic.\nThe heathen cosmogony, and the heathen idea of the activity of the gods\nin physical occurrences, contradicted the new idea of the One Almighty\nGod, before whom Nature is nothing. But even though the idea that this\nGod alone created the world, had been long accepted and established, yet\nthere were still, preserved in stereotyped expressions of language, many\nideas which preserved from oblivion and ruin features of the old modes\nof thought alongside of the new. They remain, so long as attention is\nnot drawn to the contradiction in which these separate words stand to\nthe new general system. When the clouds were no longer regarded as a\nsea, as they once were, people ceased to understand the meaning of \u2018the\nheights of the sea;\u2019 this expression no longer finds any organ of\napperception, because \u2018Sea\u2019 is no longer associated with the idea of the\nclouds. Therefore, the expression is sustained only by its traditional\nconnexion with \u2018heights.\u2019 But \u2018heights\u2019 are very closely associated with\nearth and with the idea of mountains; and thus with the Prophet\nAmos[864] this association supplanted the older one\u2014the living took the\nplace of the dead. We will now, in conclusion, return to Samson.\n\n 13. HISTORY OF THE MYTH OF THE SUN-GOD.\n\nWe will now review the entire history of the old Semitic God of the Sun\nor of Heat, as he was present to the national consciousness of Israel.\n\nI wonder whether I am mistaken? I flatter myself that I know the\nparticle by which was expressed the greatest revolution ever experienced\nin the development of the human mind, or rather by which the mind itself\nwas brought into existence. It is the particle \u2018as\u2019 in the verse[865]\n\u2018And he [the Sun] is _as_ a bridegroom, coming out of his chamber; he\nrejoices _as_ a hero to run his course.\u2019 Nature appears to us _as_ a\nman, _as_ mind, but is not man or mind. This is the birth of Mind, the\ngeneration of Poetry. This \u2018as\u2019 is unknown not only to the Vedas, but\neven to the Greeks. This does not mean that the Greeks had no poetry at\nall, but only that there is an inherent defect in their poetry, which is\nconnected with the deepest foundation of their national mind. Helios,\ndriving along the celestial road with fiery steeds, is not poetry, but\nonly becomes poetical when we tacitly insert the \u2018as\u2019 of the Psalmist.\nHe to whom Helios is a conscious being is childlike, if not childish:\nthe Psalmist is poetical.\n\nNow when such psalms were being spread abroad increasingly in Israel;\nwhen Jahveh was acknowledged as the being that brings up the sun, the\nstars and the rain-clouds, that builds the house and guards the city;\nthen the old Sun-god or Herakles was forgotten; that is, his divinity,\nand that only, was forgotten. His deeds were still recounted; but deeds\ndemand an agent. And thus out of the god, who could exist no longer in\nthe presence of Jahveh, a man was made, who with Jahveh\u2019s force to aid\nhim performed superhuman things, but in other respects lived among men\nand within human conditions, worked quite as a man, and even enjoyed his\nsuperhuman power only on human terms, namely the terms of Naziritism.\n\nDeeds were reported of some one who had long hair. But who wore his hair\nlong, but the Nazirite consecrated to Jahveh? Deeds were told, which no\none could accomplish unless exceptionally endowed with strength by\nJahveh; and Jahveh would give such privilege only to the Nazirite\nconsecrated to him. Consequently, when Samson was no longer a god, he\nmust be a Nazirite. Nevertheless, he was distinguished beyond all other\nNazirites: he was so from his very birth, like Samuel, to whom with\nNaziritism was granted Prophecy, a gift vouchsafed to others only later\nin life and occasionally. The strictly mythical character, the allusion\nto a religion of nature, was entirely lost from the stories about\nSamson. Whatever happened to him took a purely human character.\n\nThere was also a dim memory of the same forgotten god, that he was\nMelkart, i.e. \u2018king or guardian of the city.\u2019 Samson, now reduced to\nhumanity, could have been such a guardian only in a human sense, though\nperhaps in an extraordinary degree. Now Israel preserved from the first\nhalf of its political existence the memory of no other enemy so\ndangerous, so difficult to withstand, and again in its subsequent\nweakness so hateful, as the Philistines: against them Samson must have\nfought. No other foe had laid on Israel so hard a yoke or such bitter\ndegradation as the Philistines: but Samson must have avenged this on\nthem. He must not only have conquered them, but likewise have given them\na taste of his great physical and intellectual superiority: the Nazirite\nconsecrated to Jahveh could scoff at the Philistines. Thus Samson was in\nthe end a Judge, Sh\u00f4ph\u00ea\u1e6d; for in the age of the Judges, the wars with\nthe Philistines had begun, and after Eli and Samuel, Saul and David, or\neven beside any of them, Samson could not have lived. These were not\ndeliberations, but unconscious impulses, which shaped the legend of\nSamson in the national mind of Israel.\n\nNo feature of the Solar hero has suffered a more characteristic\nconversion than his end, as is seen by a comparison with the\ncorresponding polytheistic legends. Orion is blinded by the father of\nhis lady-love, and Samson had his eyes put out. But Orion kindled the\nlight of his eyes again at the rays of Helios, whereas Samson remains\nblind, and only prays to be endowed with strength to avenge the loss of\none of his two eyes.[866] It is true, his hair grows again and brings\nback his strength: after the winter comes a new spring. But all in\nvain\u2014Samson dies, notwithstanding. He dies like Herakles: but there is\nno Iolaos to wake him to a new life, no Athene and Apollon to lead him\nto Olympos, no Zeus and Here to present to him Hebe, the personification\nof the enjoyment of perpetual youth. Samson dies and remains dead; he\ndies, and tears down with him his own pillars\u2014the pillars on which he\nhad built the world\u2014to find a grave beneath them. The heathen god is\ndead, and draws his own world down with him into his own nothingness;\nhis battles were a play of shadows. Jahveh lives, \u2018he hath established\nthe world by his wisdom,\u2019 \u2018he giveth rain, the autumn and the spring\nshowers, each in its season, and keepeth to us the prescribed weeks of\nharvest,\u2019 \u2018cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night;\u2019[867] he\nlives, the Lord of the world, the King of the earth, and his hero is\nIsrael.\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 786:\n\n See W.K. Kelly, _Curiosities of Indo-European Tradition and\n Folk-lore_, London 1863, chap. II.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 787:\n\n See Kelly, _ibid._, p. 74.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 788:\n\n See Kelly, _ibid._, p. 83.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 789:\n\n See Kelly, _ibid._, 163\u20135\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 790:\n\n See Kelly, _Curiosities etc._, p. 89.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 791:\n\n See Kelly, _Curiosities etc._, p. 83\u201385, 151.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 792:\n\n See Kelly, _ibid._, p. 83, 141\u20133.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 793:\n\n See Kelly, _Curiosities etc._, pp. 37, 43.\u2014TR. The literal meaning of\n his name is _qui in matre tumescit vel praevalet_, i.e. a boring-stick\n like the lightning.\n\nFootnote 794:\n\n In English _mangle_, substantive and verb. The verb _mangle_ \u2018to tear\u2019\n is probably the same, derived from the action of _boring_. To\n _mantle_\u2014to winnow corn, to rave, to froth, may be from the same\n original root, represented by the Sanskrit, _math, manth_, in the\n sense \u2018to shake.\u2019 See Halliwell, _Dict. of Archaic and Provincial\n Words._ The Greek \u03bc\u03cc\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u2018tumult\u2019 is connected with the same root by\n Gr. Curtius, _Grundz\u00fcge der griech. Etymologie_, No. 476.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 795:\n\n The penis. The Latin _mentula_, as Prof. Weber reminds me, is clearly\n the same.\n\nFootnote 796:\n\n The boring-stick and the penis.\n\nFootnote 797:\n\n \u1e5b in Sanskrit is pronounced as _r_ with a very short vowel, _e.g._\n like _ri_ in _merrily_.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 798:\n\n Halliwell, _l.c._, gives in provincial English _bliken_ \u2018to shine,\u2019\n _blickent_ \u2018shining,\u2019 and _blink_ \u2018a spark of fire.\u2019\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 799:\n\n \u0107 in Sanskrit is the English _ch_ in _church_.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 800:\n\n This is supported by the analogy of the French _apprendre_. It should\n also be noted that Plato, in defining the signification of \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n says that it means \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 _\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd (Euthyd.\n 277. e.).\n\nFootnote 801:\n\n On all this see my _Einleitung in die Psychologie und\n Sprachwissenschaft_.\n\nFootnote 802:\n\n It is explained by Lazarus, _Leben der Seele_, II. p. 166, and by me\n in _Grammatik, Logik und Psychologie_, pp. 319\u2013340, and in\n _Charakteristik der Typen des Sprachbaues_, pp. 78 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 803:\n\n The male is the Pramantha, the female the \u1f10\u03c3\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1 (the lower piece of\n wood and the female pudenda).\n\nFootnote 804:\n\n See Kelly, _Curiosities etc._, pp. 35\u201338, 137\u2013150, 158.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 805:\n\n Num. XX. 12, XXVII. 13, 14.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 806:\n\n _Sage_, a \u2018saying\u2019 or legendary story, which may have no historical\n foundation, but be produced out of mythic matter. Where, as here, it\n is sharply distinguished from history, I render it _legend_; elsewhere\n _story_, which is generally the best English equivalent,\n notwithstanding its derivation from _historia_.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 807:\n\n The allusion is to the story of Bruin the bear and the honey, in\n Reynard the Fox: see _Reinhart_, v. 1533\u20131562, _Reinaert_, v. 601\u2013706,\n in Jacob Grimm\u2019s edition, Berlin 1834; and Goethe\u2019s modern German\n version, canto 2.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 808:\n\n Welcker, _Griechische G\u00f6tterlehre_, I. 478.\n\nFootnote 809:\n\n Welcker, _ibid._, 490.\n\nFootnote 810:\n\n Studer, _Buch der Richter_, p. 320: Sachs, _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Sprach- und\n Alterthumsforschung_, II. p. 92.\n\nFootnote 811:\n\n Preller, _R\u00f6mische Mythologie_, p. 437\u20138.\n\nFootnote 812:\n\n Ovid, _Fasti_, IV. 679 _et seqq._\n\nFootnote 813:\n\n Judges XV. 8.\n\nFootnote 814:\n\n Judges XV. 15\u201319.\n\nFootnote 815:\n\n VIII. 5. 1, p. 353.\n\nFootnote 816:\n\n III. 22. 8.\n\nFootnote 817:\n\n Judges XV. 19: \u02bf\u00can ha\u1e33\u1e33\u00f4r\u00ea.\n\nFootnote 818:\n\n Judges XV. 16.\n\nFootnote 819:\n\n _Buch der Richter_, p. 185.\n\nFootnote 820:\n\n Judges XV. 17: R\u00e2math Lech\u00ee.\n\nFootnote 821:\n\n v. 19.\n\nFootnote 822:\n\n Schwartz, _Ursprung der Mythologie_.\n\nFootnote 823:\n\n Makht\u00eash, v. 19.\n\nFootnote 824:\n\n I formerly saw in the Jawbone the representative of the Harpe (toothed\n sickle), with which Herakles cuts off the heads of the Hydra, and\n which Kronos and Perseus also employ\u2014the latter when he beheads\n Medusa. I have changed my view in favour of that here propounded,\n through consideration of the \u2018throwing,\u2019 which undoubtedly is\n significant. But complete certainty is unattainable. What meaning can\n be attached to the circumstance that the jawbone is called a \u2018fresh\u2019\n (new) one (v. 15)?\n\nFootnote 825:\n\n Judges XVI. 1\u20133.\n\nFootnote 826:\n\n Welcker, _Griech. G\u00f6tterlehre_, II. 776; Preller, _Griech. Mythol._,\n II. 154, 167; Movers, _Ph\u00f6nizier_, I. 442.\n\nFootnote 827:\n\n Welcker, _ibid._, II. 761.\n\nFootnote 828:\n\n Judges XVI. 4: Nachal S\u00f4r\u00ea\u1e33, _i.e._ Valley of the Vine.\n\nFootnote 829:\n\n I formerly took Del\u00eel\u00e2, _i.e._ the \u2018Worn out,\u2019 to be a personification\n of Nature, worn out and no longer productive in the winter-season.\n Then the name Del\u00eel\u00e2 might be compared with that of Aphrodite\n _Morpho_, supposing Movers (p. 586) to give the right interpretation\n of the latter, in discovering it to be the Syriac word for Fatigue,\n Flagging. Then Del\u00eel\u00e2 would be the Winter-goddess, and might be a\n peculiar phase of Derketo, who was worshiped in conjunction with the\n barren Sea-god Dagon (see Stark, _Gaza_, p. 285). Pausanias (III, 15.\n 8) relates that there was at Sparta an old temple with an image of\n Aphrodite to whom it belonged\u2014_i.e._ Astarte, Semiramis, etc. This\n temple (alone of all the temples that Pausanias knew) had an upper\n story, in which was an image of Aphrodite Morpho. She was represented\n sitting, veiled, and with her feet bound. Pausanias himself interprets\n the fetters to indicate women\u2019s attachment to their husbands; but this\n reading is not binding on us. I regard this Morpho as a picture of\n Nature fettered and mourning in winter. Similarly, and also at Sparta\n (_ibid._ 5) the bound Enyalios signifies the restrained solar heat of\n Mars. However, this interpretation of Del\u00eel\u00e2 as Winter stands in no\n contradiction to what is said in the text. Moon-goddess, Love-goddess,\n Chaste goddess, and Winter, are only different aspects of the same\n mythological figure, to which a name capable of many interpretations\n is very suitable. Stark (_Gaza_, p. 292) is right in asserting the\n hostility of Herakles to the descendants of Poseidon, the gloomy\n sea-god, who according to Semitic conceptions I believe to have been\n also the Winter-god (Dagon). But Movers (p. 441) appears to be also\n right in showing how, besides combating the creatures of Typhon,\n Melkart-Herakles is also hostile to the evil Moon-goddess. For she is\n only the female figure corresponding to the male Moloch, Typhon and\n Mars. In the Greek myth the place of the Semitic Lunar Astarte is\n occupied by Hera, the adversary of Herakles. She is confounded both\n with Ash\u00ear\u00e2 the goddess of Love, and with Astarte. Thus there was in\n Sparta an Aphrodite Hera (Paus. III. 13. 6). To her goats were\n sacrificed at Sparta, and only there, as to the Semitic Birth-goddess;\n and she was called \u2018Goat-eater\u2019 (\u1f2d\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f30\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, _ib._ 15. 7; Preller,\n _Griech. Myth._, p. 111; but I am of opinion that the goats have not\n the same meaning in her case as in that of Zeus). In the character of\n Astarte, as an evil Moon-goddess, a female Moloch or Mars, she appears\n when she sends the Nemean lion, the Solar heat, into the land, and on\n other occasions when she is put into connexion with the powers of evil\n (Preller, p. 109). The conception which unites opposite natural forces\n in the same divine person, which then appears under a modified form,\n could not be better expressed in architecture than it is in the\n above-mentioned temple of Aphrodite. The lower story is a temple of\n the Armed Aphrodite; the upper a temple of Aphrodite Morpho: thus the\n whole is a temple of the strict goddess, below of the Summer, above of\n the Winter. The fact that a deity of the Solar heat and the Fire is\n regarded as also a deity of the Sea, may be explained not only by the\n equal barrenness of the Desert\u2014a sea of sand, and the Sea\u2014a desert of\n water, but perhaps also by the opinion, attributed by Plutarch (_de\n Is. et Os._ c. 7) to the Egyptians, that the sea is not an independent\n element but only a morbid emanation from fire. To Morpho or Winter\n corresponds Hera, as one at variance with Zeus, or as a widow\n (Preller, p. 108). Thus then it will be clear that Del\u00eel\u00e2 may be both\n the Birth-goddess (Ash\u00ear\u00e2) and the evil Moon-goddess (Astarte), or\n more accurately the Winter-goddess (Derketo). If Semiramis exhibits a\n combination of Ash\u00ear\u00e2 with Astarte, then Del\u00eel\u00e2 shows a similar\n combination of Ash\u00ear\u00e2 with Derketo, who is only a modification of\n Astarte.\n\nFootnote 830:\n\n The derivation from the root _shmn_ is impossible, that from the root\n _shmm_ far-fetched. The simple derivation from shemes \u2018sun\u2019 appears to\n be rejected by Bertheau (_Buch der Richter_, p. 169) only \u2018because the\n long narrative concerning Samson presents no reference to a name of\n any such signification\u2019 (as \u2018the Sunny,\u2019 the Solar hero), and because,\n as he says, \u2018we do not expect to find a name of this kind anywhere in\n Hebrew antiquity.\u2019 But the matter appears to us now in a very\n different light, and the connexion with the Sun which Bertheau did not\n expect to find has now become clear.\n\nFootnote 831:\n\n That Dagon really had the form of a fish, which Movers denies, surely\n appears certain from 1 Sam. V. 4 (see Stark, _Gaza_, p. 249). And it\n would be an excess of diplomatic accuracy, such as we are not\n justified in ascribing to the Hebrew writer, to suppose that his only\n reason for writing d\u00e2g\u00f4n was that the Hebrew d\u00e2g\u00e2n \u2018corn\u2019 was\n pronounced D\u00e2g\u00f4n in Phenician. Moreover, such a word as \u2018Corn\u2019 (d\u00e2g\u00e2n)\n cannot well be a proper name. The formation of proper names of men and\n places by the termination _\u00f4n_ is excessively common, and requires no\n citation of examples.\n\nFootnote 832:\n\n Judges XVI, 22.\n\nFootnote 833:\n\n Judges XIII.\n\nFootnote 834:\n\n 1 Sam. I.\n\nFootnote 835:\n\n Num. VI. 1\u201321.\n\nFootnote 836:\n\n 1 Sam. I. 28.\n\nFootnote 837:\n\n 1 Sam. II. 11, 18, III. 3, I. 11.\n\nFootnote 838:\n\n Amos II. 11, 12.\n\nFootnote 839:\n\n Lev. X. 9.\n\nFootnote 840:\n\n Num. VI. 6, 7.\n\nFootnote 841:\n\n The circumstance that this was \u2018of Jahveh\u2019 (Judges XIV. 4) is a\n fiction interpolated into the legend by the systematising author.\n\nFootnote 842:\n\n It will be seen from the above, that I am far from subscribing to the\n judgment on the heathen religions which has in recent times been\n widely diffused among philosophers and philologians. I agree\n essentially with the judgment of the natural mind, which always sees\n delusion and superstition in heathendom. But it does not follow from\n this that the heathens were absolutely immoral: they invested with\n their own morality gods who were intrinsically representations of\n nature only.\n\nFootnote 843:\n\n See Preller, _Griech. Mythol._ II. 97; Gerhard, _Griech. Mythol._ \u00a7\n 711.\n\nFootnote 844:\n\n For this assertion I must for the present refer to what I have said in\n an article, _Zur Charakteristik der semitischen V\u00f6lker_, in the\n _Zeitschr. f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie etc._ Vol. I. p. 328 _et seqq._ In\n Liebner and others\u2019 _Jahrb\u00fccher f\u00fcr deutsche Theologie_, V. p. 669 _et\n seqq._, there is a long article by Diestel, _Der Monotheismus des\n \u00e4ltesten Heidenthums, vorz\u00fcglich bei den Semiten_. He also declares\n himself averse to the assumption of a primitive Monotheism, because it\n is destitute of all historical proof. He brings many points\n judiciously into the light, especially the absence of an accurate\n conception of Monotheism (p. 684). But when he objects to me, that in\n the above-quoted article (p. 330) I am too hard on the expression\n _Instinct_ used by Renan, inasmuch as it is to be understood as\n implying only an individual disposition of the religious mind, not a\n momentum of half-animal physical life. I must observe in reply, that I\n can scarcely imagine how else instinct can be understood but as a\n \u2018half-animal momentum\u2019; and even reason, taken as an instinct, is _eo\n ipso_ degraded to a momentum of half-animal physical life. And if\n Diestel here means by instinct a \u2018disposition of the mind,\u2019 I can see\n in such dispositions scarcely anything more than momenta of\n _half_-animal physical life. Moreover, I cannot admit any such\n \u2018dispositions of the religious mind,\u2019 which have the special object of\n their belief determined beforehand. A disposition to reasonableness in\n general, or to religiousness in general, does dwell in the human mind;\n but not a disposition so defined as to its object that a limited idea,\n such as Monotheism, could be _a priori_ inherent in it.\n\nFootnote 845:\n\n By J. Olshausen in Hirzel\u2019s _Hiob_, p. 60 note.\u2014But Ewald says\n expressly (_Ijob_, 1854, p. 126) that Rahab is everywhere _a\n mythological name for a sea-monster_, even where it stands for\n Egypt.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 846:\n\n See pp. 73, 169.\n\nFootnote 847:\n\n See _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1849, III. p. 200 _et seq._\n\nFootnote 848:\n\n Hebrew livy\u00e2th\u00e2n, n\u00e2ch\u00e2s; Sanskrit V\u1e5btra, Ahi.\n\nFootnote 849:\n\n The literal and only possible translation of the first three words of\n the verse, ge\u02bfar chayyath \u1e33aneh, rendered correctly in the Septuagint\n and Vulgate; for which the English A.V. unaccountably substitutes\n \u2018Rebuke the company of spearmen,\u2019 while the Prayer-book version goes\n even further astray.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 850:\n\n Ba\u02bfal k\u00fbn, see Movers, I. 292.\n\nFootnote 851:\n\n Job IX. 8; b\u00e2moth\u00ea y\u00e2m.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 852:\n\n Is. XIV. 14; b\u00e2moth\u00ea \u02bf\u00e2bh.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 853:\n\n It will be inferred from the above reasoning, that I should be\n inclined to assign an early age to the writer of the Book of Job. But\n I can find no reason for making him older than Amos; indeed, he may\n have lived into the lifetime of Isaiah. I must further remark that\n Schlottmann (_Das Buch Hiob verdeutscht und erl\u00e4utert_, pp. 69\u2013105,\n especially 101 _et seqq._) has expressed ideas similar to those\n propounded by me, though starting from assumptions utterly different\n in principle. To the passages of Job which he places side by side with\n corresponding ones of Amos (p. 109), the following may be added: Amos\n V. 8 and IX. 6, \u2018who calleth to the water of the (Cloud-) Sea,\u2019 and\n Job XXXVIII. 34, \u2018wilt thou lift up thy voice to the Cloud?\u2019\n\nFootnote 854:\n\n _Prometheus_, p. 391.\n\nFootnote 855:\n\n Kuhn, _Herabkunft des Feuers etc._, p. 30.\n\nFootnote 856:\n\n P. 392.\n\nFootnote 857:\n\n Preller, ib. I. 438; Kuhn, ib. p. 24, 243.\n\nFootnote 858:\n\n See p. 399.\n\nFootnote 859:\n\n See p. 425.\n\nFootnote 860:\n\n Schwartz, _Ursprung der Mythologie_, p. 251.\n\nFootnote 861:\n\n In English Tues-day, Wednes-day, Thurs-day, Fri-day, Satur-day, from\n Anglo-Saxon names of gods, Tiu or Teow, W\u00f4den, Thunor, Frige,\n S\u00e6tern.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 862:\n\n E.g. the Lady-bird, in German Marienk\u00e4fer; its Danish name, Marih\u00f6ne,\n was, according to Grimm, anciently Freyjuh\u00f6na \u2018Freyja\u2019s hen.\u2019 So\n Venus\u2019 Looking-glass (Speculum Veneris) is also called Lady\u2019s Glass;\n Pecten Veneris is Lady\u2019s Comb. There are very numerous plants named\n after Our Lady, which were probably originally dedicated to Freyja or\n Venus, as Lady\u2019s Mantle; Lady\u2019s Thistle or Lady\u2019s Milk (Carduus\n Marianus: \u2018distinguished at once by the white veins on its leaves....\n A drop of the Virgin Mary\u2019s milk was conceived to have produced these\n veins, as that of Juno was fabled to be the origin of the Milky Way.\u2019\n Hooker and Arnott, _British Flora_, p. 231); Lady\u2019s Smock (Cardamine);\n Lady\u2019s Bower or Virgin\u2019s Bower (Clematis); Lady\u2019s Fingers (Anthyllis);\n Lady\u2019s Tresses (Spiranthes or Neottia); Lady\u2019s Slipper\n (Cypripedium).\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 863:\n\n As this German example will not be familiar to all English readers, it\n is necessary to give a few words of explanation. The great Deluge\n (Gen. VI.-VIII.) is called in modern German _S\u00fcnd-fluth_, which seems\n to be Sin-flood = Flood on account of sin. But in Old High German it\n is written Sin-vluot and Sint-vluot, which cannot be identical with\n the assumed meaning of the modern word, since _sin_ (peccatum) is in\n Old High German _sunta_. Moreover, _sin_ is a prefix well known to\n most of the Teutonic languages, denoting (1) always, (2) great. In the\n former sense we have it in the Old English _singrene_ \u2018evergreen;\u2019 in\n the latter in the Anglo-Saxon _sinhere_ \u2018great army.\u2019 Hence it is\n assumed that the word in German altered its pronunciation when the\n prefix _sin_ became obsolete, being then supposed to be intended for\n _S\u00fcnd-fluth_, as is shown in the text. See Grimm, _Deut. Gram._ II.\n 554, Graff, _Althochd. Sprachschatz_, VI. 25, _Ettm\u00fcller, Lex.\n Anglosax._ p. 638, Vigfusson, _Icelandic English Dict._ s. v. S\u00ed.\n Prof. Steinthal appears now (in a letter to the translator) to doubt\n whether this history of the word is tenable; but the assumption that\n it is so may at least be allowed, in order to retain this excellent\n example of the psychological progress.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 864:\n\n See _supra_, p. 426.\n\nFootnote 865:\n\n Ps. XIX. 6 [5].\n\nFootnote 866:\n\n Judges XVI. 28: \u2018Give me strength only this once, O God, and I will\n avenge myself with _the vengeance of one of my two eyes_ on the\n Philistines.\u2019 This is the only possible meaning of the very simple\n Hebrew words nekam achath mishsheth\u00ea \u02bf\u00eanay, which were misunderstood\n by the LXX and Vulg.; and the German and English versions have merely\n followed the latter.\u2014TR.\n\nFootnote 867:\n\n Jer. X. 12, V. 24; Gen. VIII. 22.\n\n-----\n\n\n\n\n ------------------------------------\n\n INDEX.\n\nAaron, grave of, 280\u2013282\n\n\u02bfAbd Duhm\u00e2n, 73\n\nAbel a herdsman, 110;\n his grave (according to Mohammedan tradition) at \u1e62\u00e2li\u1e25iyy\u00e2, suburb of\n Damascus, 280;\n figure of the Dark Sky, 111;\n Jabal another form of the same, 111\u20132\n\nAbraham denotes the Heaven at Night, 32;\n myth of his sacrifice of Isaac, 45\u201347;\n his journey to Egypt on account of a famine, when Jahveh plagued\n Pharaoh\u2014a type of the later residence in Egypt, 275;\n his grave at Hebron, 278\u2013280;\n at Berze near Damascus, 280\n\nAbram (\u2018High Father\u2019) originally denoted Heaven, 91;\n changed into Abraham, 230\n\nAbram and Jacob, mythical ideas connected with these names not quite\n obsolete, 229\n\nAdam, grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), on Mt. Ab\u00fb \u1e32u-beys,\n 280\n\nAg\u00e2d\u00e2 contains mythology, 29\u201332;\n but must be used with caution, 32\u201334;\n a hermeneutic law of the A., that \u2018the intensity of a word\u2019s sense\n increases with the enlargement of its form,\u2019 339;\n etymologies in A., 337;\n given even in opposition to others in the Bible, 339\n\nAgni, \u2018fire\u2019 and \u2018God of fire,\u2019 367\u20138, 382, 386\u20139;\n hidden, and brought back by M\u00e2tari\u015bvan, 369\u201370\n\nAgricultural civilisation, speculation on, 211\u201314\n\nAgriculture, Fall of man connected with, 87\n\nAgriculturists love the Day and the Sun, 58\u201360;\n refer the arts of civilisation to the Sun, 202\n\nAkra (Gold Coast), people of, identify God with clouds, 224\n\n\u02bfAl\u00ee b. Ja\u02bffar al-Raz\u00ee wrote a book on the graves of the Patriarchs at\n Hebron, 279\n\nAll\u00e2h, idea of, similar to that of Jahveh, 290\u20131\n\nAmnon\u2019s liaison with Tamar, its mythical element, 181\u20132\n\nAncestors, originally mythical figures, 229, 254, 257\n\nA\u1e45giras, mythical family of, connected with Agni, 371\u20132\n\nAnschauung (_Conception_), 377\n\n\u02bfAntar, the black hero, compared with the Night, 147\u20138\n\nApperception, 376\n\nApt\u00fbchos, of Cyrene, identical with Jephthah, 104\n\nArabian children educated in the tents of Bed\u00e2w\u00ee, 88\n\nArabs travel by night, 56;\n proud of Nomadism, 79 _et seqq._;\n their poetry always conveys the scenery of the desert, 84\u20138\n\nArcher who shot an apple from his son\u2019s head, a Teutonic legend, 442\n\nAryan gods, their names date from the original unity, proved by Kuhn,\n 363\u20134\n\nAscension to heaven, characteristic of Solar heroes, 127\n\nAsh-tree of the world, in the sky, 366\n\nAsher is the \u2018Marching\u2019 (the Sun), 120\u20132;\n his grave (according to Mohammedan tradition), at Kafarmand\u00e2, 280\n\nAsh\u00ear\u00e2, the \u2018Marching,\u2019 consort of Asher (and therefore the Moon),\n 122\u20133, 158\n\nAss, called from his red colour, 181\n\nAss\u2019s Jawbone, used as a weapon by Samson;\n originally name of a locality, 400;\n similar to Onugnathos in Lakonia, 400\u20131;\n denotes the Lightning, and is therefore thrown, 402\n\nAssyria and Babylon exerted an intellectual influence on the Hebrews\n during the Captivity, 319\n\nAssyrian poetry, very similar to the Hebrew Psalms, 318\n\nAssyrians have gradations of authority among gods as among men, 267\n\nAztecs adopted Toltec civilisation, 236\n\n\nBabel (Babylon), confusion of tongues at, story of, arose at Babylon,\n 330\u20131, 335\n\nBabylon and Assyria exerted an intellectual influence on the Hebrews\n during the Captivity, 319\n\nBabylonian story of the Creation, very similar to the Hebrew, 323\n\nBaghirmi, people in Central Africa, identify God with the Storm, 224\n\nBalaam (Bil\u02bf\u00e2m) as interpreted in the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, 33\u20134\n\nBarak, \u2018Lightning,\u2019 is made a national hero, 256;\n the Judge (Lightning), 430\n\nBed\u00e2w\u00ee, their Sun-worship, 72;\n they are regarded as the true Arabs, 82\u20134;\n they regard God as a great Chief or Sheykh, 266\n\nBedouins. See Bed\u00e2w\u00ee\n\nBel, in the Louvre, with ox-horns on his tiara, 179\n\nBenjamin, \u2018Son of the right side,\u2019 176;\n his sons\u2019 names, their origin given in the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2 on etymological\n grounds, 337;\n a similar story in Arabic, 339\n\nBernstein\u2019s theory on the differentiation of the legends between North\n and South, 286\n\nBh\u1e5bgu-s, same as Phlegyans, Lightning, 372\u20133;\n the first man, 389\n\nBilhah, a Solar figure, loves or marries Jacob and Reuben, figures of\n Night, 171\u20133\n\nBird, denotes Lightning, 384\n\nBlack, the colour of Night, 146\u20139\n\nBochica, Solar hero of the Muyscas, author of civilisation, 204\u20135\n\nBunsen confounds religion and mythology, 12;\n does not admit any Hebrew mythology, 12\u201313\n\n\nCain, with Abel, 110\u20132;\n the \u2018Smith,\u2019 113, and so in the Myth of Civilisation, 213\u20134, 217;\n Solar hero, 113\u20134, 126\u20137;\n his descendants Solar, 126 _et seqq._;\n progenitor of the human race, 210;\n grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), at \u1e62\u00e2li\u1e25iyy\u00e2, suburb of\n Damascus, 280;\n called in Arabic \u1e32\u00e2bil in assonance to H\u00e2bil, according to a frequent\n practice, 347\u20139;\n although the name \u1e32\u00e2yin is also known, 349\n\nCalabar legend of the first human pair, 87\n\nCanaan is cursed for Ham\u2019s fault, 255;\n his grave (according to Mohammedan tradition), near Hebron, 280\n\nCats draw Freyja\u2019s car, 342\n\nCat-worship of the Egyptians, Solar, 342\n\nCaves in Canaan, traditions relating to, 278\n\nCherub perhaps denotes the Covering Cloud, and is of Hebrew origin,\n 196\u20137\n\nChiun. See _Kiyy\u00fbn_\n\nChrysoros the \u2018Opener,\u2019 hero of the Myth of Civilisation, 216\u20137\n\nCivilisation, Myth of, 198 _et seqq._\n refers the higher civilisation to the Sun, 200\u20136\n\nClouds, forms and names of, 163\u20135;\n clouds groaning, 164,\n weeping, 165;\n worshiped by nomadic Hebrews, 227;\n mythologically called \u2018Heights of the Sea,\u2019 426, 443\n\nClouds and Serpents, Hebrew observers of, 227\u20138\n\nCoalescence of psychological Motions or Combinations, 375\n\nColours only imperfectly distinguished and expressed in the mythic age,\n 141\u2013155\n\nCombination of psychological elements, 375\n\nComparative Mythology not limited by distinctions of race, 9\n\nConception (_Anschauung_), 377\n\nConcubines in mythology are of opposite natures to their men, 158\n\nConfusion of tongues at Babel (Babylon), story of, arose at Babylon,\n 330\u20131, 335\n\nConquered impose their superior civilisation on their conquerors, 236\u201340\n\nCow in mythology denotes the Sun, 343\u20134\n\nCreation, Hebrew story of, conceived at Babylon, 323\u20136;\n established the Sabbath on a new basis, 324;\n Babylonian story very similar, 323\n\nCreator, idea of a, essential conception of Jahveh, 299\n\nCrocodile, mythologically identical with the Sun, worshiped in Egypt,\n 342\u20133\n\n\u0106yavana, son of Bh\u1e5bgu, is Lightning, 372\u20133, 391\n\n\nDagon, \u2018Fish,\u2019 Solar god of civilisation, 215\n\nDan, the \u2018Moving,\u2019 the Sun, 123\u20134\n\nDarkness expressed by words meaning \u2018to Cover,\u2019 190\u20134\n\nDarkness and Blackness associated, 147\u20139\n\nDavid\u2019s story has features belonging to the Solar Myth:\n redness, beautiful eyes, throws stones, 109;\n he kills Goliath as Thor kills Hrungnir, 430\n\nDawn and Sunset expressed by the same words, 43\n\nDawn flies, or is a bird, 116;\n the name denotes \u2018moving,\u2019 120;\n it is in Aramaic \u1e63afr\u00e2 (Arab, a\u1e63far), \u2018golden,\u2019 150\u20131;\n its colour saffron, 152;\n changes from red to white, 152;\n or from white to red, 153\n\nDawn (or the Sun) is called the \u2018Uncoverer,\u2019 194\n\nDay called \u2018red,\u2019 146;\n \u2018white,\u2019 153\u20134;\n loved by Agriculturists, 58, 60\n\nDeborah, the \u2018Bee,\u2019 i.e. the Rain-cloud, 430\n\nDel\u00eel\u00e2, loved by Samson, 405;\n meaning of her name, 405, 406 _note_\n\nDeluge, Biblical story of the, 319;\n Assyrian very similar, 320;\n Hebrews must have borrowed it from Babylonians, 320\u20132;\n Greek, Indian, and Persian stories of, not very ancient, 319\u201320\n\nDeuteronomy, expresses a compromise between Priests and Prophets with a\n leaning towards the Prophets, 307\u20138\n\nDifferentiation of Hebrew national legends after the political\n separation, 275\u201387\n\nDinah, the \u2018Moving,\u2019 i.e. the Sun, 123\u20135\n\nDionysus strikes wine and water out of the rock, as a Solar hero, 429;\n called Liknites, \u2018in a cradle,\u2019 389\n\nDivine names, Hebrew and Phenician, 246\u20137\n\nDivision of the kingdom, 275\u20137\n\nDragon (Serpent) denotes Rain, 224\u20136\n\nDragon of the Storm, Semitic, 423;\n and see _Rahabh_\n\nDual deities, male and female, among Semites, 16\n\nDualism in sexual connections, 182\n\nDualism, religious, occurs in savage tribes as well as in \u00cer\u00e2n, 15\n\nDyu, _nom._ Dyaus, 67\n\n\nEaster, heathen goddess, 431\n\nEden, story of, arose at Babylon, 324\u20136;\n \u2018Garden of Eden\u2019 denotes a pleasure-garden in Joel before the\n Captivity, 325, but has a fuller meaning to the Prophets of the\n Captivity, 325\u20136\n\nEdom, the \u2018Red,\u2019 solar epithet, 209;\n subsequently called Esau, the \u2018Worker,\u2019 214, 217\n\nElijah, Solar hero, produces drought, 167\u20138;\n a typical Jahveist, 305\u20136;\n precursor of the great Day of Jahveh, 271\u20132\n\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem, originally polytheistic, but became monotheistic, 270\u20131;\n idea of El\u00f4h\u00eem opposed by Jahveistic Prophets, 297\u20138\n\nEl\u00f4h\u00eem or \u00cal, names compounded with, and similar ones compounded with\n Jahveh, 292\u20133\n\nElohistic documents Jahveistic in character, only using \u2018El\u00f4h\u00eem\u2019 for the\n Patriarchal age, 313\n\nElohistic writings subsequent to the compromise with Jahveism, their\n piety, 314\u20135\n\nEnoch, Solar hero, 127\u20138\n\nEphraim, a geographical name derived from Ephr\u00e2th (Beth-lehem), 175,\n 283\u20135\n\nEsau, hairy, signifies the Sun with his rays, 136\u20138;\n red, 139\u201340\n\nEtymologising in legends, secondary and not original, 331\u20135;\n yet fables are invented to account for names, 332;\n etymologies assigned which are quite unsatisfactory, 333\u20134\n\nEuhemerus, his system of mythology, regarding gods as human promoters of\n civilisation deified by posterity out of gratitude, 201\n\nEve, or the \u2018Circulating,\u2019 an epithet of the Sun, 210;\n grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), at Jedd\u00e2, 280\n\nExodus, story of, contains mythic elements, 23, 28\n\nEye, an image of the Sun, 106\u201310\n\nEzekiel, prophet of the compromise between Priests and Prophets in the\n Captivity, 307, 317\n\n\nFall of man connected with Agriculture, 87\n\nFeronia (like Phoroneus) originally a Lightning-bird, 385, 428\n\nFigurative language conceals myths, 26\u20137\n\nFigures of speech, apparent, often preserve something historical, 29\n\nFire, given by nature, 365;\n produced by boring, 366, 380\u20131;\n observed in the sky, which was believed to be the origin of the\n earthly fire, 366\n\nFire-myth analysed, 376\u201382\n\nFoxes, represent Solar heat, 398;\n Samson tied firebrands to their tails and sent them into the\n Philistines\u2019 corn, 398;\n similar Roman usages, 398\n\nFratricide accompanies mythical founding of cities, 113\n\nFreyja, her car drawn by Cats, 342;\n converted in Christian times into Virgin Mary, 431\u20132\n\n\nGad, like Jupiter, the star of Fortune, 176\n\nGaza, gates of, carried off by Samson, a disguised myth of a descent to\n the nether-world, 403\u20134\n\nGazelle, designation of the rising sun, 178\u20139\n\nGazelles, golden, at Ka\u02bfb\u00e2 at Mekka, 178\n\nGeiger, L., his researches on the faculty of distinguishing colours, 141\n\nGender-distinctions in nouns, supposed by Bleek to encourage formation\n of mythology, 2\u20133\n\nGenealogies invented through national hatred, 358\u20139;\n concocted by national pride or for other reasons, 357\u20138\n\nGeorge, Saint, kills a dragon\u2014a general Aryan Myth, 431\n\nGerman gods\u2019 names preserved in names of days of the week, 431\n\nGerman heathen practices in Christian times, 430\u20132\n\nGetube, in an Ojibwa legend, has twelve children, 174\n\nGideon, the \u2018Smasher,\u2019 is made a National hero, 256\n\nGold, called sulphur-coloured and red, 142\u20134\n\nGreeks love Agricultural life, 80;\n preserve traces of Nomadism, 70\u20131\n\nGynaeocracy, 76\n\n\nHagar, the \u2018Flying,\u2019 i.e. the Sun, 119\n\nHaggai expresses the compromise between Priests and Prophets, 308\n\nHair in mythology denotes Rays of sun or moon, 137\u201340\n\nHajnal, \u2018dawn,\u2019 in Hungarian, denoted originally \u2018white,\u2019 351\n\nHam is made ancestor of the Canaanites, 255;\n his grave (according to Mohammedan tradition), in the district of\n Damascus, 280\n\nHamor, father of Shechem, called \u2018Ass\u2019 from the red colour, which is\n Solar, 181\n\nHeaven, called the \u2018High\u2019 in the Semitic languages, 91\n\nHebrew Mythology became Jahveistic, 433\u20134;\n its existence denied by Bunsen, 12\u20133\n\nHebrew Myths did not grow into religion, 248\u20139;\n but generally became history, 249, 255\n\nHebrew national consciousness, its effect on the Myth, 251\u20134\n\nHebrew national individuality aroused, 259\n\nHebrew political centralisation confirmed Monotheism, 268\n\nHebrews (\u02bfIbhr\u00eem), the \u2018Wanderers,\u2019 53;\n show sympathy with Shepherds as against Agriculturists, 86\u20137;\n adored the Serpent in the Desert, 226;\n adopted the Solar religion of Canaan, 227, 240\u20132;\n their history begins with the conquest of Canaan, 232;\n remained Nomads some time after leaving Egypt, 232;\n abandoned Nomadism on passing the Jordan, 233;\n took social and political institutions from the Phenicians, 242;\n forgot the fact of their original polytheism and set\nback the origin of Jahveism to Abraham or even Adam, 433;\n _compared_ but did not _identify_ heroes with the Sun, 443\n\nHebron, legends of the Patriarchs localised at, 278\u201380;\n therefore chosen by David for his residence, 280\n\nHeimdall (the Sun) has the point of his horn in Niflheim, 179\n\nHelios converted by Modern Greeks into Ilias (Elijah), 128\n\nHephaestos originally identical with Prometheus and Agni, 390\n\nHerakles, original Aryan Sun-god, 417;\n he kills a lion, 395\u20136, 399,\n a feature which appears to be borrowed from the Semites (the Aryan\n Sun-god kills a Dragon), 418;\n as also the story of Foxes with firebrands attached to their tails,\n 419;\n he dies, but Iolaus wakes him to new life on Olympos, 446\n\nHeroic age, in Book of Judges, contains mythology, 20\u20131\n\nHind, a designation of the rising sun, 178\u20139\n\nHistory, mythic features attach themselves to, 22\u20133\n\nHoney, in Samson\u2019s riddle, 394\u20137\n\nHorns denote the Sun\u2019s rays, 179\n\nHorv\u00e1th and V\u00f6r\u00f6smarty\u2019s Hungarian Myths, 252\n\nH\u00fbd, prophet, his grave (according to Mohammedan tradition), 283\n\nHuythaca, \u2018the Moon,\u2019 wife of Bochica, Solar hero of the Muyscas, whom\n she opposes in his promotion of civilisation, 204\n\nHyks\u00f4s adopted Egyptian culture, 236\n\n\nIchneumon, mythologically representing the Night, worshiped in Fay\u00fbm,\n 343\n\nIdea (_Vorstellung_), 377\n\nIfe, a town of the gods of the Yorubas, 100\n\nImmortality, belief in, characterised the Jahveistic Prophets, 305\n\nIndians, traces of Nomadic myths among, 67\u201370\n\nInterlacing of psychological Combinations, 376\n\nIokaste, the \u2018Evening-glow,\u2019 mother and wife of Oedipus, 187\n\n\u00cer\u00e2n, traces of Nomadism in, 68\u20139\n\nIranian (Persian) theological ideas influence the Hebrews in and after\n the Captivity, 326\u20139\n\nIrej, ancestor of the Iranians, his sufferings a type of the subjugation\n of his race, 258\n\nIsaac, the \u2018Laugher,\u2019 originally the Sun, 92\u201396;\n myth of the sacrifice of, 45\u20137, 104\u20136;\n his grave at Hebron, 278\u20139\n\nIs\u00e2f and N\u00e2\u02beil\u00e2, two Arabian idols (Soil and Rain), 182\u20133\n\nIsaiah, the second, the Prophet of the Captivity, 307\n\nIsis, the horned, 179\n\nIsl\u00e2m not favourable to Nomadism, 86\n\nIsrael, i.e. the Hebrew nation, _created_ by Jahveh, 299\n\nIssachar, called an Ass, a Solar figure, 177 _note_, 181\n\nIstar, Babylonian goddess, is the Moon, 158\u20139\n\n\nJacob, the \u2018Follower,\u2019 i.e. the Night, the Dark Sky, 97;\n fights with a man who cannot conquer him (the Dawn), 140;\n struggles with Laban, \u2018White,\u2019 and Esau, \u2018Red\u2019 (Solar figures), 133\u20135,\n 140\u20131, 156;\n his name changed to Israel, 230;\n identified with Israel, 256;\n his grave at Hebron, 278\u20139\n\nJacob\u2019s Blessing (Gen. XLIX.) contains remains of descriptions of\n mythical figures, 177\n\nJacob\u2019s family, the Moon and Stars, 173;\n his twelve sons were not originally named, 174;\n some belong to the original myth, 175;\n some names are later, ethnographical or geographical, 175\n\nJael, \u2018Wild Goat,\u2019 i.e. Cloud, 430;\n is made a national hero, 256\n\nJahveh, the specially Hebrew name of God (El\u00f4h\u00eem being used by the\n Canaanites), its origin in the idea of Nationality, 272;\n idea of, 290;\n Mohammedan idea of All\u00e2h similar, 290\u20131;\n name Jahveh known before the Separation, 292;\n the idea first introduced by the Prophets, 294\u20139;\n indicates a Creator, 299\u2013301;\n \u2018I am who I am,\u2019 300\u20131;\n National God of the Hebrews, 301;\n who hated foreign vice, 303\u20134;\n but also cosmopolitan, 302\u20133;\n not an esoteric religion, 304\u20135;\n friendly to both North and South and favourable to their reunion,\n 305\u20138\n\nJahveh, names compounded with, and similar ones compounded with El\u00f4h\u00eem\n (\u00cal), 292\u20133\n\nJahveism reforms ancient legends for moral ends, 312;\n adopted by the sacerdotal party in the Captivity through a compromise\n effected with the Prophets, 307\u20138;\n came to be supposed to be primitive, 433\n\nJahveistic documents show a very thorough-going Jahveism, 313;\n their peculiar prophetic phraseology, 314\n\nJanus, connected with navigation, 102;\n has one bearded and one smooth face, 137\n\nJapanese Myths of Civilisation, 207\n\nJapheth. See _Jepheth_\n\nJawbone, used by Samson. See _Ass\u2019s Jawbone_\n\nJel\u00e2l al-D\u00een al-Suy\u00fbt\u00ee, his Kit\u00e2b al-aw\u00e2\u02beil, 212\n\nJemsh\u00eed, Solar hero, author of Iranian Civilisation, 202\u20133;\n establishes castes, 203;\n is brought to ruin by Zohak, 203\n\nJepheth, a Solar figure, 132\n\nJephthah, myth of his killing his daughter, 96\u20137;\n his name mythical, its meaning, 97, 104\n\nJoktan, denotes the Sedentary people, 54\n\nJonah, features of the Solar myth attached to him, 102\n\nJoseph (the Rain), born of Rachel (the Cloud), 166, 175;\n his contest with Zal\u00eechah, 168;\n with his brothers the Possessors of arrows, i.e. the Sun\u2019s rays,\n 168\u20139;\n his bow is the Rainbow, 169\u201370;\n his story was worked out by the Northerns in his favour against the\n Southerns with their Judah, 285\u20136;\n taken by the Northerns as their hero and ancestor at the separation,\n 278\n\nJubal, Solar hero, inventor of music, 130\n\nJudah, his connexion with Tamar, a Solar legend, of Sun and Fruit,\n 180\u20132;\n an ethnographical name, 175, 179\u201383\n\nJudges (Sh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem), Hebrew, legends of, suffered no theocratic\n transformation, 287\u20138;\n were preserved mainly in the Northern kingdom, 289\n\nJudges, Phenician magistrates (Suffetes), 242\u20135\n\n\n\u1e32\u00e2bil and H\u00e2bil, Arabic for Cain and Abel, 347\u20139\n\nK\u00e2fir, \u2018Infidel,\u2019 its original meaning, 193\n\nKalypso and Kalyke, the \u2018Covering Night,\u2019 192\n\nKenite origin of name Jahveh asserted by Tiele, 293\n\nKhitem dynasty adopted Chinese civilisation, 236\n\nKiyy\u00fbn (Chiun), the star, worship of, by the Hebrews, 220\n\nKuhn\u2019s _Herabkunft des Feuers_ reviewed by Steinthal, 363\n\nKulyatu, Solar hero of the Voguls and author of Civilisation, 207\n\nKutub al-aw\u00e2\u02beil, \u2018Libri Principiorum,\u2019 212\n\n\u1e32uza\u1e25, Semitic (Arabic) Cloud-god, 73\u20134, 423\n\n\nLamb, white (a Cloud), adored by the Arabs, 223\n\nLamech. See _Lemech_\n\nLaughter, words denoting, originally meant to \u2018shine bright,\u2019 93;\n of the morning or the sun and the stars, 94\u20136\n\nLeah, the \u2018Weary,\u2019 is the Night when the sun is weary, 162\n\nLegends, Hebrew, affected by the political separation of North and\n South, 277\u201389\n\nLemech (Lamech), Solar hero, kills his son, 129\n\nLengthened forms of words have greater intensity of meaning than simple,\n according to the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, 340\n\nLenormant claims Mythology for the Semites, 11\n\nLevi, \u2018Serpent,\u2019 i.e. Rain, 183\u20137\n\nLeviathan (livy\u00e2th\u00e2n), \u2018Serpent,\u2019 either Lightning or Rain, 184\u20136;\n Storm-Dragon, 423, 425\n\nLevites oppose the Solar worship of the Golden Bull, 226\n\nLeviticus, Book of, expresses the compromise between Priests and\n Prophets, with a leaning towards the Priests, 308\n\nLife, treated in mythology as identical with fire, 367, 371\n\nLightning, identified with a bird\u2014eagle, hawk, or woodpecker, 366;\n which again might be transformed into a tree\u2014rowan, ash, 366\u20137\n\nLightning-Bird represents both Fire and Man, 366, 368, 384\u20136, 389\n\nLion, Semitic symbol of Summer-heat, 396\u20137\n\nLivy\u00e2th\u00e2n. See _Leviathan_\n\nLocalisation of myths, 278\u201385\n\nLo\u1e33m\u00e2n, identified with Balaam, 33, 34 _note_ 100\n\nLongevity, characteristic of Solar heroes, 356;\n and therefore of Noah to the Arabs and Ethiopians, 356\u20137\n\nLot, \u2018Night,\u2019 and his daughters, a Solar myth, 189\u201395\n\nLot\u2019s daughters denote the Glow of morning or evening, 194;\n their names, 194\u20135;\n they are made mothers of Moab and Ammon, 254\n\nLove, especially incest, common in mythology, 187\n\n\nMalachi, expresses the compromise between Priests and Prophets, 308\n\nMama Oello and Manco Copac, sons of the Sun, teachers of civilisation in\n Peru, 208\n\nManchu dynasty adopted Chinese civilisation, 236\n\nManco Copac and Mama Oello, sons of the Sun, teachers of civilisation in\n Peru, 208\n\nManna reminds us of the Nectar and Mead of the gods, 429\n\nMary, the Virgin, succeeds in Christian times to the functions of\n Freyja, Holda and Bertha, 431\u20132, 443\n\nM\u00e2tari\u015bvan brings back Agni or fire to men, 369;\n is identical with Prometheus, 370\u20133\n\nMe\u02bf\u00f4nen\u00eem and menachash\u00eem, 227\n\nMexican Solar and Lunar Chronology, 65\n\nMilcah is the Moon, 158\n\nMilk and honey, characteristic of a Solar land, 28\u20139\n\nMo\u1e25ammed approved the Nomadic life of shepherds, 81\n\nMohammedans, how they transformed foreign legends, 354\u20136\n\nMonotheism favourable to the growth of science, according to Lange and\n Comte, against Renan, 6\u20137;\n exclusive, and prompted by the Hebrew National spirit, 269;\n supposed to be primeval and to have preceded Polytheism\u2014an untenable\n proposition, 261, 421;\n supposed to have been given by Divine revelation\u2014untenable, 420\n\nMonotheistic \u2018Instinct,\u2019 refuted by the example of the Semites, 260\n\nMoon, worship of, earlier than Sun-worship, 71\u20136;\n three phases, 204\u20136;\n turns red (ch\u00e2phar) through shame, 351\u20132\n\nMoon-goddess, her names, 158\u201360\n\nMoorish architecture derived from life in the Desert, 85\n\nMormons speak of God as the great \u2018President,\u2019 266\n\nMoses, in the myth, resembles Prometheus, 23, 391\u20132;\n is like a Sun-god in general, 428\u20139;\n has horns, denoting a nimbus of rays, 179;\n is put in the water in a chest when an infant like Perseus, etc., 428;\n kills an Egyptian and flies, like a Solar hero, 429;\n stretches his hand with the staff over the sea (originally the sea of\n Clouds) and divides it, 429;\n his grave, 281\u20132\n\nMotion, psychological term, 375\n\nM\u00fcller, J.G., of Basle, thinks the Hebrews originally spoke a distinct\n language, and afterwards adopted that of Canaan, 239\u201340\n\nMusic invented by Solar heroes, 130\n\nMuyscas of Bogot\u00e0, their Myth of Civilisation, 204\u20135\n\nMyth, its beginning and its end, 50;\n prior to Religion, 51\n\nMythical names not used as human names, 229\n\nMythological faith and worship still live as superstition etc., 364\n\nMythology, precursor of Religion, not itself religion, 5;\n common to all mankind, 10;\n begins with perception and description of physical phenomena, 39;\n is transformed into allegory when the original meaning of the names is\n forgotten, 39;\n turns into Religion, 218 _et seqq._;\n and must produce Polytheism, 262;\n denied by Bunsen to the Hebrews, 12\u20133\n\nMyths represent the daily phenomena of nature, 14;\n outlive the stage of Civilisation which produced them, 77 _et seqq._;\n are interpreted in a theocratic sense, of pious servants of God, 273;\n do not interest the Prophets, 309\u201310;\n are converted from a polytheistic to a monotheistic form, 420\n\n\nNames of persons preserve myths, 24\u20135\n\nNaphtali, \u2018with plaited locks,\u2019 denotes the Dawn, 178\u20139;\n grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), at Kafarmand\u00e2, 280\n\nNational sentiment transforms Myths, 253\n\nNational spirit promoted an exclusive monotheism among the Hebrews,\n 269\u201372\n\nNationalisation of Hebrew Myths, 257\n\nNations, table of (in Gen. X.), revised at Babylon, 329\u201330\n\nNaziritism, 410\u201314\n\nNehushtan, the (brazen?) Serpent, 184;\n adored, 226\n\nNew Druids, 252\n\nNight, loved by Nomads, 51\u20137;\n used by them in reckoning time and distances, 61\u20133;\n precedes Day in the Nomad\u2019s chronology, 62;\n is blind, or has lost an eye, 110;\n has wings to _cover_, 117;\n is called a \u2018Coverer\u2019 and has a black covering, 190\u20134;\n is called Black, 146,\n and compared to ink, 148,\n and to a \u2018Sud\u00fbs\u2019 (a greenish garment), 149\u201350\n\nNight-sky and rain worshiped by the Arabs, 219\u201321\n\nNimrod, the \u2018Hunter,\u2019 i.e. the Sun, 31\u20132, 135\u20136\n\nNimr\u00fbd, Arabic story of, identical with that of Oedipus, 188\u20139\n\nNinka-Si, Accadian horned goddess, Solar, 179\n\nNoah, inventor of Agricultural implements, a figure of the Sun at noon,\n 130\u20131;\n second progenitor of the human race, 210;\n why he is made the hero of the Deluge-story, 322;\n noted among the Arabs and Ethiopians for longevity, 356\u20137\n\nNomads love Night and Rain, 54\u20137, 60;\n reckon distances and time by nights, 61\u20133;\n have no history, 231\n\nNormans adopted French language and transplanted it to England, 236\n\nNorth and South separated into two kingdoms, 275\u20137;\n effect of separation on national legends, 277\u201389\n\n\nOannes, the Sun, in the Assyrian and Babylonian mythology, Hero of\n Civilisation, 214\u20135, 224\n\nOedipus, Solar hero, his story, 187\n\nOlave, Saint, succeeds to the office of Thor in pursuing and destroying\n giants, 431\n\n\u02bfOmar, Chalif, approves of the Bed\u00e2w\u00ee, 82\n\nOpener, frequent designation of the Sun, 97\u20138\n\nOrigins, legends of, 211\u20133\n\nOrion, 426\u20137, 446\n\nOrpheus, son of the Sun, author of Civilisation, 208\n\nOsterhase (Easter Hare) indicates the swiftness of the goddess Ostara,\n the Sun, 118\n\n\nParticiple passive used for active in Hebrew, 350\u20131\n\nPatriarchal stories, sources for discovery of Mythology, 19\n\nPatriarchs, their names mythical, referring to phenomena of Nature, 18;\n are made types of Elohistic piety, 274;\n years and cycles of years in their history, elaborated at Babylon, 329\n\nPerez and Zerah (Pharez and Zarah), Solar figures, 183\n\nPerizzites, their name denotes the \u2018Wanderers,\u2019 53\n\nPersian antagonism to the Arabs gives a tone to legends in the\n Sh\u00e2hn\u00e2meh, 258\n\nPersian (Iranian) theological ideas influence the Hebrews in and after\n the Captivity, 326\u20139\n\nPersians, false genealogies invented by or for them, 357\u20138\n\nPharez. See _Perez_\n\nPhenicians, their civilisation prevailed for long in Africa, but yielded\n to the Arabian, 237;\n their influence on the tribes of Canaan and the Hebrews, 235, 240\n\nPhenix, mythical designation of the Sun, 344\n\nPhilo Herennius, his report on Sanchuniathon, 215\u20137\n\nPhlegyans, identical with Bh\u1e5bgu-s, 373\n\nPhoroneus, at Argos, brought fire like Prometheus, 368;\n was originally epithet of the Lightning-bird, 385\n\nPhut [P\u00fb\u1e6d] denotes the \u2018Runners,\u2019 53\n\nPicus, \u2018Woodpecker,\u2019 a Lightning-bird, 368;\n is the first man, 389\n\nPillar of Cloud, belongs to the worship of the Night-star, 222\u20133\n\nPleiades, 426\n\nPoetry of the Arabs always conveys the Scenery of the Desert, 84\u20135\n\nPolytheism and Monotheism, successive stages of religious thought, 5\n\nPolytheism results from Mythology and necessarily precedes Monotheism,\n 262;\n tends, through a unifying process, to Monotheism, 263;\n shows a monotheistic tendency when one god is supreme over others,\n 264;\n mythical, in Israel, exhibited in the Prophets and Poets, 421\u201330\n\nPools of the Sun, in which his heat is cooled, 340\u20131\n\nPramantha, the boring-stick to produce fire, 370, 387;\n Moses\u2019 staff the same, 391, 428\n\nPramati, son of \u0106yavana, son of Bh\u1e5bgu, identical with Prometheus, 391\n\nPrometheus, inventor of Navigation, 103;\n his name, corresponding to Sans. _Pr\u00e2m\u00e2thyu-s_, from _pramantha_\n \u2018boring-stick,\u2019 370;\n connexion of the name with \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9, 374\u20135;\n identical in function with M\u00e2tari\u015bvan, 371;\n a Titan (enemy of the gods) and yet benefactor of men, 389\u201391;\n created man, 389\n\nPrometheus, legend of, Steinthal\u2019s Essay on, 363\u201392\n\nProper names in Mythology originally appellative, 37\u20138\n\nProphets introduced the real _idea_ of Jahveh, 294\u2013308;\n do not care for Myths, 309\u201310,\n nor the Patriarchal history and Moses, 310\u20131\n\nPsychological Terminology, 375\u20136\n\nPsychology, a necessary factor of Mythology, 35\u20137\n\nPyrrha, the \u2018Red,\u2019 mother of mankind, 210\n\n\nQuails, connected with Apollon and Diana, as well as with Moses, 429\n\n\nRachel, the \u2018Sheep,\u2019 i.e. the Cloud, 162\u20135;\n weeps for her children, i.e. pours down Rain, 165;\n bears Joseph, the \u2018Rain,\u2019 166, 175;\n her grave, 283\n\nRahabh, the Storm-Dragon, 422\u20136;\n denotes Egypt, 423\n\nRain with the dark rainy sky loved by Nomads, 54\u20137;\n the child of the Cloud or the Sky, 166\u20137;\n called a Serpent, 185\u20136;\n worshiped by the Nomadic Hebrews, 227;\n attributed by the Mohammedans to the Stars, 221\n\nRainbow is called Joseph\u2019s Bow, 169\u201370\n\nRed, for a light colour in general, 141;\n the colour of Day, 146\n\nReduplicated forms have, according to the Ag\u00e2d\u00e2, a greater intensity of\n meaning than unreduplicated, 340\n\nReligion, developed out of Mythology, 218 _et seqq._;\n takes its form partly from _political_ analogies, 264\u20138\n\nReligion, founders of, born from Virgins, 208\u20139\n\nRenan says the Semites have no Mythology, 4;\n is mistaken in asserting that Arabic absorbs only dialects related to\n itself, 237\u20139\n\nReuben, the \u2018Twilight,\u2019 takes to himself Bilhah, a Solar heroine, 171\u20133;\n his grave (according to Mohammedan tradition), at Jahr\u00e2n, 280\n\nRiddle proposed by Samson, 394\u20137\n\nRoman Calendar, 65\u20136\n\nRowan, a Lightning-tree, 366\u20137\n\n\nSabbath, established on a new basis by the story of Creation, 324\n\nSacrifice, human, condemned by Jahveism in the rewritten story of the\n sacrifice of Isaac, 312\n\n\u1e62afr\u00e2, (in Aramaic), \u2018Dawn,\u2019 its etymology, 150\n\nSage (German), 393 _note_\n\nSamson, a Sun-god, 21\u20132, 407\u201310;\n his name Shimsh\u00f4n from Shemesh, \u2018Sun,\u2019 408;\n like other Sun-gods, flies after victory, 399,\n and is pernicious to the Philistines, destroying their corn by\n foxes, 398,\n and is given to sexual pleasure, 404;\n is attacked by a lion, 394,\n and kills him, 398;\n solution, 396\u20139;\n his heroism with the ass\u2019s jawbone, 400;\n was said, in a myth now lost, to have gone down to the netherworld,\n 404;\n his death, 406, 446;\n is said in the narrative to be a Nazirite, but this is a late addition\n to the story, 413;\n motive for it, 445;\n compared with the other Judges, is seen to be mythical, 414\u20135,\n but is admirably described, 415\u20136\n\nSamson, legend of, Steinthal\u2019s Essay on, 392\u2013446\n\nSamuel, a typical prophet, 306;\n a Nazirite, 410\u20132\n\nSanchuniathon\u2019s account of Phenician Mythology, 215\u20137\n\nSandan or Sandon, Assyrian and Lydian Sun-god, kills a lion, 396\u20137\n\nSarah, the \u2018Princess of heaven,\u2019 i.e. the Moon, 158\n\nScarabeus, worship of the, 343\n\nSeraph, mythical name of a dragon, 197\n\nSerpent (livy\u00e2th\u00e2n and rahabh) denotes Lightning and Rain, 27\u20138;\n Rain, 224\u20136\n\nSerpents crushed by Herakles, 184\n\nSeth, grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), in the valley of\n Yahf\u00fbf\u00e2, in Antilibanus, 280\n\nShamgar, Solar hero, another form of Samson, 429\u201330\n\nShechem, a name of the Morning, 25\u20136;\n converted into a prince of the Hivvites, 254\n\nShem, the \u2018Lofty,\u2019 denotes the Heaven, 132\n\nSh\u00f4phe\u1e6d\u00eem (Judges), Phenician magistrates, 242\u20135\n\nSinai, consecrated to Sin, the Moon, 160\n\nSinflut became S\u00fcndflut\u2014psychological process, 441\u20132\n\nSolar heroes found cities, 113, 127;\n remarkable for longevity, 356\n\nSpace the earliest category understood by man, 40\u20132\n\nStars worshiped by Nomadic Hebrews, 219\u201330\n\nSteinthal, H., Essay on the original form of the legend of Prometheus,\n 363\u201392;\n on the legend of Samson, 392\u2013446\n\nStork, brought fire and brings children to earth, 367\n\nSud\u00fbs (sundus), greenish, the colour of Night, 149\u201350\n\nSukk\u00f4th (Tabernacles), Feast of, connected with worship of Stars and\n Rain, 220\u20132\n\nSulphur, red, Arabic phrase for something impossible, 143\n\nSun, passes through the sea at night, 28, 99\u2013104;\n loved by Agriculturists, 58, 60;\n called in Mythology the \u2018Marching,\u2019 \u2018Running,\u2019 114\u201322;\n called the \u2018Uncoverer,\u2019 194;\n regarded as an Eye, 106\u201310,\n as a Well, his light being the water, 345;\n as a Wheel, 381;\n represents Fire in heaven, and is the source of light and growth, 378;\n his rays described as a moisture, whether water, milk or wine, 345\u20137;\n his three phases, 204\u20136;\n his colour, 353\u20134,\n saffron, 151,\n grey, 153,\n white, 154\u20135;\n turns pale through shame, 351\u20132;\n synonyms of, become obsolete, 218;\n pools and whips for, 340;\n his sons are authors of Civilisation, 208\n\nSunset and Dawn expressed by the same words, 43\n\n\nTabernacles (Sukk\u00f4th), Feast of, connected with the worship of Stars and\n Rain, 220\u20132\n\nT\u00e2j al-D\u00een b. \u1e24amm\u00fby\u00e2, al-Sarachsh\u00ee, on \u2018Origins,\u2019 212\n\nTamar, the \u2018Fruit,\u2019 her liaison with Judah, and with Amnon, 180\u20132\n\nTann\u00een, \u2018Extended dragon,\u2019 i.e. Rain, 423, 427;\n Crocodile, and Egypt, 424\u20135\n\nTent of heaven denotes the sky by night, 111\n\nTheocracy, a league between Religious and National ideas, 273\n\nThor, converted in Christian times into St. Olave, 431\n\nThunder is a groaning or roaring of the clouds, 164\u20135\n\nTime, a category not understood till after Space, and expressed in\n language by the same terms, 40\u20133\n\nT\u00f4r\u00e2, formed of chu\u1e33\u1e33\u00e2 and d\u00e2bh\u00e2r conjoined, 315\n\nTribes, Hebrew, named earlier than Jacob\u2019s sons, 176\n\nTubal-cain and Jabal, duplicates of Cain and Abel, 111\u20133, 130\n\n\nUnion, sexual, its significance in Mythology, 171\u20133\n\nUriah, grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), 280\n\nUsurpers, other Gods besides Jahveh, according to Hartmann, 269\u201370\n\n\nVaivasuta, son of the Sun, Indian legislator, 208\n\nVaru\u1e47a and \u039f\u1f54\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 the \u2018Coverer,\u2019 190\n\nVedic myths so primitive as to explain themselves, 364\n\nVirgins made to conceive by the Sun\u2019s rays are the mothers of founders\n of legislation and religion, 208\u20139\n\nVoguls, their Myth of Civilisation, 207\n\nV\u00f6r\u00f6smarty and Horv\u00e1th\u2019s Hungarian Myths, 252\n\nVorstellung (_Idea_), 377\n\n\nWa-jeeg-e-wa-kon-ay, in an Ojibwa legend, repels evil spirits, 174\n\nWamasai people in East Africa identify God and Rain, 224\n\nWara\u1e33 (in Ethiopic), \u2018gold,\u2019 and connected words, 144\u20136\n\nWeek, 65;\n of five days among the Chinese, Mongols, Azteks, and Mexicans, 66;\n of eight days in Old Calabar, 66\n\nWell, an image of the Sun, its water being the rays, 345\n\nWheel, epithet of the Sun\u2019s chariot, 210\n\nWhips of the Sun, to drive him along his course, 341\n\nWhite, light-coloured in general, 141;\n the colour of Day, 152\u20133\n\nWings assigned to the Sun and Dawn, 115\u20137\n\nWives, legitimate, in Mythology are homogeneous with their husbands, 158\n\nWoodpecker (Picus), personification of Lightning, i.e. Fire, 366,\n and of Man, 368, 389\n\n\nYears and cycles of years in Patriarchal history, elaborated at Babylon,\n 329\n\nYere\u1e33 (in Hebrew), \u2018Grass,\u2019 its etymology, 145\n\n\nZal\u00eech\u00e2, the \u2018Swift-marching,\u2019 Solar heroine, her contest with Joseph\n (Rain), 168\n\nZarah. See _Zerah_\n\nZebulun, the \u2018Round,\u2019 the Setting Sun, 177\u20138\n\nZechariah expresses the compromise between Priests and Prophets, 308\n\nZerah and Perez (Zarah and Pharez), Solar figures, 183\n\nZeus has ram\u2019s horns, 179\n\nZillah, the \u2018Night,\u2019 mother of Tubal-cain, 130\n\nZilpah, \u2018Marching,\u2019 125-6\n\nZipporah, grave of (according to Mohammedan tradition), 280\n\nZ\u00fbz\u00eem, a nomadic tribe, 53\n\n LONDON: PRINTED BY\n SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE\n AND PARLIAMENT STREET\n\n ------------------------------------------------------\n\n 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.\n LONDON, _March_ 1876.\n\n\n\n\n GENERAL LIST OF WORKS\n\n PUBLISHED BY\n\n MESSRS. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.\n\n * * * * *\n\n PAGE\n\n\n ARTS, MANUFACTURES, &c 26\n\n\n ASTRONOMY & METEOROLOGY 17\n\n\n BIOGRAPHICAL WORKS 7\n\n\n CHEMISTRY & PHYSIOLOGY 24\n\n\n DICTIONARIES & other BOOKS of REFERENCE 15\n\n\n FINE ARTS & ILLUSTRATED EDITIONS 25\n\n\n HISTORY, POLITICS, HISTORICAL MEMOIRS, 1\n &c.\n\n\n INDEX 41 to 44\n\n\n MENTAL & POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 8\n\n\n MISCELLANEOUS & CRITICAL WORKS 12\n\n\n NATURAL HISTORY & PHYSICAL SCIENCE 19\n\n\n POETRY & the DRAMA 36\n\n\n RELIGIOUS & MORAL WORKS 29\n\n\n RURAL SPORTS, HORSE & CATTLE MANAGEMENT, 37\n &c.\n\n\n TRAVELS, VOYAGES, &c. 32\n\n\n WORKS of FICTION 35\n\n\n WORKS of UTILITY & GENERAL INFORMATION 39\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n HISTORY, POLITICS, HISTORICAL MEMOIRS, &c.\n\n ------------------\n\n_The History of England from the Accession of James II._\n\n _By the Right Hon. Lord Macaulay._\n\nSTUDENT\u2019S EDITION, _2 vols. cr. 8vo. 12s_.\nPEOPLE\u2019S EDITION, _4 vols. cr. 8vo. 16s_.\nCABINET EDITION, _8 vols. post 8vo. 48s_.\nLIBRARY EDITION, _5 vols. 8vo. \u00a34_.\n\n_Critical and Historical Essays contributed to the Edinburgh Review._\n\n _By the Right Hon. Lord Macaulay._\n\nCHEAP EDITION, _crown 8vo. 3s. 6d_.\nSTUDENT\u2019S EDITION, _crown 8vo. 6s_.\nPEOPLE\u2019S EDITION, _2 vols. crown 8vo. 8s_.\nCABINET EDITION, _4 vols. 24s_.\nLIBRARY EDITION, _3 vols. 8vo. 36s_.\n\n\n_Lord Macaulay\u2019s Works_.\n\n _Complete and uniform Library Edition_.\n\n _Edited by his Sister, Lady Trevelyan_.\n\n _vols. 88 vo. with Portrait, \u00a35. 5s_.\n\n_The History of England from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat of the\n Spanish Armada_.\n\n _By J.A. Froude, M.A_.\n\n CABINET EDITION, _12 vols. cr. 8vo. \u00a33. 12s_.\n LIBRARY EDITION, _12 vols. 8vo. \u00a38. 18s_.\n\n_The English in Ireland in the Eighteenth Century_.\n\n _By J.A. Froude, M.A_.\n\n _3 vols. 8vo. \u00a32. 8s_.\n\n_Journal of the Reigns of King George the Fourth and King William the\n Fourth_.\n\n _By the late Charles Cavendish Fulke Greville, Esq_.\n\n _Edited by H. Reeve, Esq_.\n\n _Fifth Edition_. _3 vols. 8vo. price 36s_.\n\n_The Life of Napoleon III. derived from State Records, Unpublished\n Family Correspondence, and Personal Testimony_.\n\n _By Blanchard Jerrold_.\n\n _In Four Volumes 8vo. with numerous Portraits and Facsimiles_. VOLS.\n I. _and_ II. _price 18s. each_.\n\n \u2042 _The Third Volume is now in the press_.\n\n_Recollections and Suggestions, 1813\u20131873._\n\n _By John Earl Russell, K. G_.\n\n _New Edition, revised and enlarged_. _8vo. 16s_.\n\n_Introductory Lectures on Modern History delivered in Lent Term 1842;\n with the Inaugural Lecture delivered in December 1841._\n\n _By the late Rev. Thomas Arnold, D.D_.\n\n _8vo. price 7s. 6d._\n\n_On Parliamentary Government in England: its Origin, Development, and\n Practical Operation_.\n\n _By Alpheus Todd_.\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. \u00a31. 17s_.\n\n_The Constitutional History of England since the Accession of George\n III. 1760\u20131870._\n\n _By Sir Thomas Erskine May, K.C.B. D.C.L_.\n\n _Fifth Edition. 3 vols. crown 8vo. 18s_.\n\n_Democracy in Europe; a History_.\n\n _By Sir Thomas Erskine May, K.C.B. D.C.L_.\n\n _2 vols. 8vo_.\n\n [_In the press_.\n\n_Lectures on the History of England from the Earliest Times to the Death\n of King Edward II_.\n\n _By W. Longman, F.S.A_.\n\n _Maps and Illustrations. 8vo. 15s_.\n\n_The History of the Life and Times of Edward III_.\n\n _By W. Longman, F.S.A_.\n\n _With 9 Maps, 8 Plates, and 16 Woodcuts_, _2 vols. 8vo. 28s_.\n\n_History of England under the Duke of Buckingham and Charles the First,\n 1624\u20131628._\n\n _By S. Rawson Gardiner, late Student of Ch. Ch_.\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. with two Maps, 24s_.\n\n_Popular History of France, from the Earliest Times to the Death of\n Louis XIV_.\n\n _By Elizabeth M. Sewell, Author of \u2018Amy Herbert\u2019 &c._\n\n _Crown 8vo_.\n\n [_Nearly ready_.\n\n_The History of Prussia, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day;\n tracing the Origin and Development of her Military Organisation_.\n\n _By Captain W.J. Wyatt_.\n\n _Vols. I. & II_. _A.D. 700 to A.D. 1525. 8vo. 36s._\n\n_History of Civilisation in England and France, Spain and Scotland_.\n\n _By Henry Thomas Buckle_.\n\n _3 vols. crown 8vo. 24s._\n\n_A Student\u2019s Manual of the History of India from the Earliest Period to\n the Present_.\n\n _By Col. Meadows Taylor, M.R.A.S_.\n\n _Second Thousand. Cr. 8vo. Maps, 7s. 6d._\n\n_Studies from Genoese History_.\n\n _By Colonel G.B. Malleson, C.S.I. Guardian to His Highness the\n Mahar\u00e1j\u00e1 of Mysore_.\n\n _Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Native States of India in Subsidiary Alliance with the British\n Government; an Historical Sketch_.\n\n _By Colonel G.B. Malleson, C.S.I. Guardian to the Mahar\u00e1j\u00e1 of Mysore_.\n\n _With 6 Coloured Maps, 8vo. price 15s._\n\n_The History of India from the Earliest Period to the close of Lord\n Dalhousie\u2019s Administration_.\n\n _By John Clark Marshman_.\n\n _3 vols. crown 8vo. 22s. 6d._\n\n_Indian Polity; a View of the System of Administration in India_.\n\n _By Lieut.-Colonel George Chesney_.\n\n _Second Edition, revised, with Map. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Waterloo Lectures; a Study of the Campaign of 1815._\n\n _By Colonel Charles C. Chesney, R.E_.\n\n _Third Edition_. _8vo. with Map, 10s. 6d._\n\n\n_Essays in Modern Military Biography_.\n\n _By Colonel Charles C. Chesney, R.E_.\n\n _8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_The British Army in 1875; with Suggestions on its Administration and\n Organisation_.\n\n _By John Holms, M.P_.\n\n _New and Enlarged Edition. Crown_ 8vo. _with Diagrams_, _4s. 6d._\n\n_The Oxford Reformers\u2014John Colet, Erasmus, and Thomas More; being a\n History of their Fellow-Work_.\n\n _By Frederic Seebohm_.\n\n _Second Edition. 8vo. 14s._\n\n_The New Reformation, a Narrative of the Old Catholic Movement, from\n 1870 to the Present Time; with an Historical Introduction_.\n\n _By Theodorus_.\n\n _8vo. price 12s._\n\n_The Mythology of the Aryan Nations_.\n\n _By Geo. W. Cox, M.A. late Scholar of Trinity College, Oxford_.\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 28s._\n\n_A History of Greece_.\n\n _By the Rev. Geo. W. Cox, M.A. late Scholar of Trinity College,\n Oxford_.\n\n _Vols. I. and II_. _8vo. Maps, 36s._\n\n_The History of the Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides_.\n\n _Translated by Richd. Crawley, Fellow of Worcester College, Oxford_.\n\n _8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Tale of the Great Persian War, from the Histories of Herodotus_.\n\n _By Rev. G.W. Cox, M.A_.\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_General History of Greece to the Death of Alexander the Great; with a\n Sketch of the Subsequent History to the Present Time_.\n\n _By the Rev. George W. Cox, M.A. Author of \u2018The Aryan Mythology\u2019 &c_.\n\n _Crown 8vo. with Maps, 7s. 6d._\n\n_General History of Rome from the Foundation of the City to the Fall of\n Augustulus, B.C. 753-A.D. 476._\n\n _By the Very Rev. C. Merivale, D.D. Dean of Ely_.\n\n _With 5 Maps, crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_History of the Romans under the Empire_.\n\n _By Dean Merivale, D.D_.\n\n _8 vols. post 8vo. 48s._\n\n\n_The Fall of the Roman Republic; a Short History of the Last Century of\n the Commonwealth._\n\n _By Dean Merivale, D.D._\n\n _12mo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Sixth Oriental Monarchy; or the Geography, History, and Antiquities\n of Parthia. Collected and Illustrated from Ancient and Modern\n sources._\n\n _By Geo. Rawlinson, M.A._\n\n _With Maps and Illustrations. 8vo. 16s._\n\n_The Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy; or, a History of the Sassanians:\n with Notices Geographical and Antiquarian._\n\n _By Geo. Rawlinson, M.A._\n\n _With Map and 95 Illustrations. 8vo. 28s._\n\n_Encyclop\u00e6dia of Chronology, Historical and Biographical; comprising the\n Dates of all the Great Events of History, including Treaties,\n Alliances, Wars, Battles, &c. Incidents in the Lives of Eminent Men,\n Scientific and Geographical Discoveries, Mechanical Inventions, and\n Social, Domestic, and Economical Improvements._\n\n _By B.B. Woodward, B.A. and W.L.R. Cates._\n\n _8vo. 42s._\n\n_The History of Rome._\n\n _By Wilhelm Ihne._\n\n _Vols. I. and II. 8vo. 30s. Vols. III. and IV. in preparation._\n\n_History of European Morals from Augustus to Charlemagne._\n\n _By W.E.H. Lecky, M.A._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 28s._\n\n_History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in\n Europe._\n\n _By W.E.H. Lecky, M.A._\n\n _Cabinet Edition, 2 vols. crown 8vo. 16s._\n\n_Introduction to the Science of Religion: Four Lectures delivered at the\n Royal Institution; with two Essays on False Analogies and the\n Philosophy of Mythology._\n\n _By F. Max M\u00fcller, M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics._\n\n _Translated from the German of Dr. E. Zeller, by Oswald J. Reichel,\n M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 14s._\n\n_Socrates and the Socratic Schools._\n\n _Translated from the German of Dr. E. Zeller, by the Rev. O.J.\n Reichel, M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d._\n\n\n_Plato and the Older Academy._\n\n _Translated, with the Author\u2019s sanction, from the German of Dr. E.\n Zeller by S. Frances Alleyne and Alfred Goodwin, B.A. Fellow of\n Balliol College, Oxford._\n\n _Post 8vo._\n\n [_Nearly ready._\n\n_Sketch of the History of the Church of England to the Revolution of\n 1688._\n\n _By T.V. Short, D.D. sometime Bishop of St. Asaph._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Historical Geography of Europe._\n\n _By E.A. Freeman, D.C.L._\n\n _8vo. Maps._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n_The Student\u2019s Manual of Ancient History: containing the Political\n History, Geographical Position, and Social State of the Principal\n Nations of Antiquity._\n\n _By W. Cooke Taylor, LL.D._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Student\u2019s Manual of Modern History: containing the Rise and\n Progress of the Principal European Nations, their Political History,\n and the Changes in their Social Condition._\n\n _By W. Cooke Taylor, LL.D._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The History of Philosophy, from Thales to Comte._\n\n _By George Henry Lewes._\n\n _Fourth Edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 32s._\n\n_The Crusades._\n\n _By the Rev. G.W. Cox, M.A._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with Map, 2s. 6d._\n\n_The Era of the Protestant Revolution._\n\n _By F. Seebohm, Author of \u2018The Oxford Reformers.\u2019_\n\n _With 4 Maps and 12 Diagrams. Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d._\n\n_The Thirty Years War, 1618\u20131648._\n\n _By Samuel Rawson Gardiner._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with Maps, 2s. 6d._\n\n_The Houses of Lancaster and York; with the Conquest and Loss of\n France._\n\n _By James Gairdner._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with Map, 2s. 6d._\n\n_Edward the Third._\n\n _By the Rev. W. Warburton, M.A._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with Maps, 2s. 6d._\n\n_The Age of Elizabeth._\n\n _By the Rev. M. Creighton, M.A., late Fellow and Tutor of Merton\n College, Oxford._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with Maps, 2s. 6d._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n BIOGRAPHICAL WORKS.\n\n ------------------\n\n_The Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay._\n\n _By his Nephew, G. Otto Trevelyan, M.P._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. with Portrait, price 36s._\n\n_The Life of Sir William Fairbairn, Bart. F.R.S. Corresponding Member of\n the National Institute of France, &c._\n\n _Partly written by himself; edited and completed by William Pole,\n F.R.S. Member of Council of the Institution of Civil Engineers._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n_Arthur Schopenhauer, his Life and his Philosophy._\n\n _By Helen Zimmern._\n\n _Post 8vo. with Portrait, 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Life, Works, and Opinions of Heinrich Heine._\n\n _By William Stigand._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. with Portrait of Heine, price 28s._\n\n_Memoirs of Baron Stockmar._\n\n _By his Son, Baron E. Von Stockmar. Translated from the German by\n G.A.M. Edited by F. Max M\u00fcller, M.A._\n\n _2 vols. crown 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Admiral Sir Edward Codrington, a Memoir of his Life; with Selections\n from his Correspondence._\n\n _Abridged from the larger work, and edited by his Daughter, Lady\n Bourchier._\n\n _With Portrait, Maps, &c. Crown 8vo. price 7s. 6d._\n\n_Life and Letters of Gilbert Elliot, First Earl of Minto, from 1751 to\n 1806, when his Public Life in Europe was closed by his Appointment to\n the Vice-Royalty of India._\n\n _Edited by the Countess of Minto._\n\n _3 vols. post 8vo. 31s. 6d._\n\n_Autobiography._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Isaac Casaubon, 1559\u20131614._\n\n _By Mark Pattison, Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford._\n\n _8vo. price 18s._\n\n_Biographical and Critical Essays, reprinted from Reviews, with\n Additions and Corrections._\n\n _By A. Hayward, Q.C._\n\n _Second Series, 2 vols. 8vo. 28s. Third Series, 1 vol. 8vo. 14s._\n\n\n_The Memoirs of Sir John Reresby, of Thrybergh, Bart. M.P. for York, &c.\n 1634\u20131689._\n\n _Written by Himself. Edited from the Original Manuscript by James J.\n Cartwright, M.A._\n\n _8vo. price 21s._\n\n_Lord George Bentinck; a Political Biography._\n\n _By the Right Hon. B. Disraeli, M.P._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Essays in Ecclesiastical Biography._\n\n _By the Right Hon. Sir J. Stephen, LL.D._\n\n _Cabinet Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland; Swift, Flood, Grattan,\n O'Connell._\n\n _By W.E.H. Lecky, M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Dictionary of General Biography; containing Concise Memoirs and Notices\n of the most Eminent Persons of all Ages and Countries._\n\n _By W.L.R. Cates._\n\n _New Edition, 8vo. 25s. Supplement, 4s. 6d._\n\n_Life of the Duke of Wellington._\n\n _By the Rev. G.R. Gleig, M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. with Portrait, 5s._\n\n_The Rise of Great Families; other Essays and Stories._\n\n _By Sir Bernard Burke, C.B. LL.D._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_Memoirs of Sir Henry Havelock, K.C.B._\n\n _By John Clark Marshman._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Vicissitudes of Families._\n\n _By Sir Bernard Burke, C.B._\n\n _2 vols. crown 8vo. 21s._\n\n ------------------\n\n MENTAL and POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.\n\n_Comte\u2019s System of Positive Polity, or Treatise upon Sociology._\n\n _Translated from the Paris Edition of 1851\u20131854, and furnished with\n Analytical Tables of Contents. In Four Volumes, each forming in some\n degree an independent Treatise:\u2014_\n\n _Vol. I. General View of Positivism and Introductory Principles.\n Translated by_ J.H. Bridges, M.B. _formerly Fellow of Oriel College,\n Oxford. 8vo. price 21s._\n\n _Vol. II. The Social Statics, or the Abstract Laws of Human Order.\n Translated by_ Frederic Harrison, M.A. _8vo. price 14s._\n\n _Vol. III. The Social Dynamics, or the General Laws of Human Progress\n (the Philosophy of History). Translated by_ E.S. Beesly, M.A.\n _Professor of History in University College, London. 8vo._\n\n [_Nearly ready._\n\n _Vol. IV. The Synthesis of the Future of Mankind. Translated by\n Richard Congreve, M.D., and an Appendix, containing the Author\u2019s Minor\n Treatises, translated by_ H.D. Hutton, M.A. _Barrister-at-Law. 8vo._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n\n_Order and Progress: Part I. Thoughts on Government; Part II. Studies of\n Political Crises._\n\n_By Frederic Harrison, M.A. of Lincoln\u2019s Inn._\n\n_8vo. 14s._\n\n \u2018We find from this book\u2014a large part, and by far the more valuable\n part, of which is new\u2014that Mr. HARRISON has devoted careful attention\n to what we shall call the constructive problems of political science.\n Whoever has mistaken him for a commonplace Radical, either of the\n Chartist or the Trades Unionist type, has been wrong.... The best\n political thinkers for a quarter of a century or upwards have more or\n less vaguely felt that one grand problem they had to solve was how our\n governing apparatus may be made to yield good government; but we are\n not aware that any writer has looked it more fully in the face, or\n more carefully scanned it with a view to a solution, than Mr.\n HARRISON.\u2019\n\n LITERARY WORLD.\n\n_Essays, Political, Social, and Religious._\n\n _By Richd. Congreve, M.A._\n\n _8vo. 18s._\n\n_Essays, Critical and Biographical, contributed to the Edinburgh\n Review._\n\n _By Henry Rogers._\n\n _New Edition. 2 vols. crown 8vo. 12s._\n\n_Essays on some Theological Controversies of the Time, contributed\n chiefly to the Edinburgh Review._\n\n _By Henry Rogers._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Democracy in America._\n\n _By Alexis de Tocqueville. Translated by Henry Reeve, Esq._\n\n _New Edition. 2 vols. crown 8vo. 16s._\n\n_On Representative Government._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Fourth Edition, crown 8vo. 2s._\n\n_On Liberty._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. crown 8vo. 1s. 4d._\n\n_Principles of Political Economy._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 30s. or 1 vol. crown 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Essays on some Unsettled Questions of Political Economy._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Second Edition. 8vo. 6s. 6d._\n\n_Utilitarianism._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Fourth Edition. 8vo. 5s._\n\n_A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Eighth Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. 25s._\n\n_Examination of Sir William Hamilton\u2019s Philosophy, and of the principal\n Philosophical Questions discussed in his Writings._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Fourth Edition. 8vo. 16s._\n\n_Dissertations and Discussions._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _4 vols. 8vo. price \u00a32. 6s. 6d._\n\n\n_Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind._\n\n _By James Mill. New Edition, with Notes, Illustrative and Critical._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 28s._\n\n_The Law of Nations considered as Independent Political Communities; the\n Rights and Duties of Nations in Time of War._\n\n _By Sir Travers Twiss, D.C.L. F.R.S._\n\n _New Edition, revised; with an Introductory Juridical Review of the\n Results of Recent Wars, and an Appendix of Treaties and other\n Documents. 8vo. price 21s._\n\n_Church and State; their relations Historically Developed._\n\n _By T. Heinrich Geffcken, Professor of International Law at the\n University of Strasburg. Translated from the German by E. Fairfax\n Taylor._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n _A Systematic View of the Science of Jurisprudence._\n\n _By Sheldon Amos, M.A._\n\n _8vo. 18s._\n\n_A Primer of the English Constitution and Government._\n\n _By Sheldon Amos, M.A._\n\n _Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Outlines of Civil Procedure. Being a General View of the Supreme Court\n of Judicature and of the whole Practice in the Common Law and Chancery\n Divisions under all the Statutes now in force. With Introductory\n Essay, References, Time Table, and Index. Designed as a Systematic and\n Readable Manual for Students, and as a Handbook of General Practice._\n\n _By Edward Stanley Roscoe, Barrister-at-Law._\n\n _12mo. price 3s. 6d._\n\n_Principles of Economical Philosophy._\n\n _By H.D. Macleod, M.A. Barrister-at-Law._\n\n_Second Edition, in 2 vols. Vol. I. 8vo. 15s. Vol. II. Part I. price\n 12s._\n\n_The Institutes of Justinian; with English Introduction, Translation,\n and Notes._\n\n _By T.C. Sandars, M.A._\n\n _Fifth Edition. 8vo. 18s._\n\n_Lord Bacon\u2019s Works, Collected and Edited by R. L. Ellis, M.A. J.\n Shedding, M.A. and D.D. Heath._\n\n _New and Cheaper Edition. 7 vols. 8vo. \u00a33. 13s. 6d._\n\n\n_Letters and Life of Francis Bacon, including all his Occasional Works.\n Collected and edited, with a Commentary, by J. Spedding._\n\n _7 vols. 8vo. \u00a34. 4s._\n\n_The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle. Newly translated into English._\n\n _By R. Williams, B.A._\n\n _8vo. 12s._\n\n_The Politics of Aristotle; Greek Text, with English Notes._\n\n _By Richard Congreve, M.A._\n\n _New Edition, revised. 8vo. 18s._\n\n_The Ethics of Aristotle; with Essays and Notes._\n\n _By Sir A. Grant, Bart. M.A. LL.D._\n\n _Third Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. price 32s._\n\n_Bacon\u2019s Essays, with Annotations._\n\n _By R. Whately, D.D._\n\n _New Edition. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_Picture Logic; an Attempt to Popularise the Science of Reasoning by the\n combination of Humorous Pictures with Examples of Reasoning taken from\n Daily Life._\n\n _By A. Swinbourne, B.A._\n\n _Second Edition; with Woodcut Illustrations from Drawings by the\n Author. Fcp. 8vo. price 5s._\n\n_Elements of Logic._\n\n _By R. Whately, D.D._\n\n _New Edition. 8vo. 10s. 6d. cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d._\n\n_Elements of Rhetoric._\n\n _By R. Whately, D.D._\n\n _New Edition. 8vo. 10s. 6d. cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d._\n\n_An Outline of the Necessary Laws of Thought: a Treatise on Pure and\n Applied Logic._\n\n _By the Most Rev. W. Thomson, D.D. Archbishop of York._\n\n _Twelfth Thousand. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_An Introduction to Mental Philosophy, on the Inductive Method._\n\n _By J.D. Morell, LL.D._\n\n _8vo. 12s._\n\n_Philosophy without Assumptions._\n\n _By the Rev. T.P. Kirkman, F.R.S. Rector of Croft, near Warrington._\n\n _8vo. price 10s. 6d._\n\n_Ueberweg\u2019s System of Logic, and History of Logical Doctrines._\n\n _Translated, with Notes and Appendices, by T.M. Lindsay, M.A.\n F.R.S.E._\n\n _8vo. 16s._\n\n\n_The Senses and the Intellect._\n\n _By A. Bain, LL.D._\n\n _Third Edition, 8vo. 15s._\n\n_The Emotions and the Will._\n\n _By Alexander Bain, LL.D. Professor of Logic in the University of\n Aberdeen._\n\n _Third Edition, thoroughly revised, and in great part re-written 8vo.\n price 15s._\n\n_Mental and Moral Science; a Compendium of Psychology and Ethics._\n\n _By A. Bain, LL.D._\n\n _Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. Or separately: Part I. Mental\n Science, 6s. 6d. Part II. Moral Science, 4s. 6d._\n\n_On the Influence of Authority in Matters of Opinion._\n\n _By the late Sir George Cornewall Lewis, Bart._\n\n _New Edition, 8vo. 14s._\n\n_Hume\u2019s Treatise on Human Nature._\n\n _Edited, with Notes, &c. by T.H. Green, M.A. and the Rev. T.H. Grose,\n M.A._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 28s._\n\n_Hume\u2019s Essays Moral, Political, and Literary._\n\n _By the same Editors._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 28s._\n\n \u2042 _The above form a complete and uniform Edition of_ HUME\u2019S\n _Philosophical Works._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n MISCELLANEOUS & CRITICAL WORKS.\n\n_Miscellaneous and Posthumous Works of the late Henry Thomas Buckle._\n\n _Edited, with a Biographical Notice, by Helen Taylor._\n\n _3 vols. 8vo. \u00a32. 12s. 6d._\n\n_Short Studies on Great Subjects._\n\n _By J.A. Froude, M.A._\n\n CABINET EDITION, _2 vols. crown 8vo. 12s._\n LIBRARY EDITION, _2 vols. demy 8vo. 24s._\n\n_Manual of English Literature, Historical and Critical._\n\n _By Thomas Arnold, M.A._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Lord Macaulay\u2019s Miscellaneous Writings._\n\n LIBRARY EDITION, _2 vols. 8vo. Portrait, 21s._\n PEOPLE\u2019S EDITION, _1 vol. cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d._\n\n_Lord Macaulay\u2019s Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches._\n\n _Students\u2019 Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Speeches of the Right Hon. Lord Macaulay, corrected by Himself._\n\n _People\u2019s Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_The Rev. Sydney Smith\u2019s Essays contributed to the Edinburgh Review._\n\n_Authorised Edition, complete in One Volume. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. sewed,\n or 3s. 6d. cloth._\n\n\n_The Wit and Wisdom of the Rev. Sydney Smith._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_German Home Life; a Series of Essays on the Domestic Life of Germany._\n\n _Reprinted, with Revision and Additions, from_ FRASER\u2019S MAGAZINE. _1\n vol. crown 8vo._\n\n [_Nearly ready._\n\n _The Miscellaneous Works of Thomas Arnold, D.D. Late Head Master of\n Rugby School and Regius Professor of Modern History in the Univ. of\n Oxford._\n\n _8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n _Realities of Irish Life._\n\n _By W. Steuart Trench._\n\n _Cr. 8vo. 2s. 6d. sewed, or 3s. 6d. cloth._\n\n _Lectures on the Science of Language._\n\n _By F. Max M\u00fcller, M.A. &c._\n\n _Eighth Edition. 2 vols. crown 8vo. 16s._\n\n _Chips from a German Workshop; being Essays on the Science of\n Religion, and on Mythology, Traditions, and Customs._\n\n _By F. Max M\u00fcller, M.A._\n\n _4 vols. 8vo. \u00a32. 18s._\n\n _Southey\u2019s Doctor, complete in One Volume._\n\n _Edited by Rev. J.W. Warter, B.D._\n\n _Square crown 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_Lectures delivered in America in 1874._\n\n _By Charles Kingsley, late Rector of Eversley._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Families of Speech. Four Lectures delivered at the Royal Institution._\n\n _By F.W. Farrar, D.D._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Chapters on Language._\n\n _By F.W. Farrar, D.D._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s._\n\n_A Budget of Paradoxes._\n\n _By Augustus De Morgan._\n\n _Reprinted, tenth Author\u2019s Additions, from the_ Athen\u00e6um. _8vo. 15s._\n\n_Apparitions; a Narrative of Facts._\n\n _By the Rev. B.W. Savile, M.A. Author of \u2018The Truth of the Bible\u2019 &c._\n\n _Crown 8vo. price 4s. 6d._\n\n_The Oration of Demosthenes on the Crown._\n\n _Translated by the Right Hon. Sir R.P. Collier._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Miscellaneous Writings of John Conington, M.A._\n\n _Edited by J.A. Symonds, M.A. With a Memoir by H.J.S. Smith, M.A._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. 28s._\n\n\n_Recreations of a Country Parson._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Two Series, 3s. 6d. each._\n\n_Landscapes, Churches, and Moralities._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Seaside Musings on Sundays and Weekdays._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Changed Aspects of Unchanged Truths._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Counsel and Comfort from a City Pulpit._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Lessons of Middle Age._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Leisure Hours in Town._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_The Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Sunday Afternoons at the Parish Church of a Scottish University City._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_The Commonplace Philosopher in Town and Country._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Present-Day Thoughts._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Critical Essays of a Country Parson._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_The Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson._\n\n _By A. K. H. B._\n\n _Three Series, 3s. 6d. each._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n DICTIONARIES and OTHER BOOKS of REFERENCE.\n\n_A Dictionary of the English Language._\n\n _By R.G. Latham, M.A. M.D. Founded on the Dictionary of Dr. S.\n Johnson, as edited by the Rev. H.J. Todd, with numerous Emendations\n and Additions._\n\n _4 vols. 4to. \u00a37._\n\n_Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases, classified and arranged so as\n to facilitate the expression of Ideas, and assist in Literary\n Composition._\n\n _By P.M. Roget, M.D._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_English Synonymes._\n\n _By E.J. Whately. Edited by Archbishop Whately._\n\n _Fifth Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 3s._\n\n_Handbook of the English Language. For the use of Students of the\n Universities and the Higher Classes in Schools._\n\n _By R.G. Latham, M.A. M.D. &c. late Fellow of Kings College,\n Cambridge; late Professor of English in Univ. Coll. Lond._\n\n _The Ninth Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_A Practical Dictionary of the French and English Languages._\n\n _By L\u00e9on Contanseau, many years French Examiner for Military and Civil\n Appointments, &c._\n\n _Post 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Contanseau\u2019s Pocket Dictionary, French and English, abridged from the\n Practical Dictionary, by the Author._\n\n _Square 18mo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_A New Pocket Dictionary of the German and English Languages._\n\n _By F.W. Longman, Balliol College, Oxford. Founded on Blackley and\n Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s Practical Dictionary of the German and English\n Languages._\n\n _Square 18mo. price 5s._\n\n_A Dictionary of Roman and Greek Antiquities. With 2,000 Woodcuts from\n Ancient Originals, illustrative of the Arts and Life of the Greeks and\n Romans._\n\n _By Anthony Rich, B.A._\n\n _Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n\n_New Practical Dictionary of the German Language; German-English and\n English-German._\n\n _By Rev. W.L. Blackley, M.A. and Dr. C.M. Friedl\u00e4nder._\n\n _Post 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Mastery of Languages; or, the Art of Speaking Foreign Tongues\n Idiomatically._\n\n _By Thomas Prendergast._\n\n _Second Edition. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_A Greek-English Lexicon._\n\n _By H.G. Liddell, D.D. Dean of Christchurch, and R. Scott, D.D. Dean\n of Rochester._\n\n _Sixth Edition. Crown 4to. 36s._\n\n_A Lexicon, Greek and English, abridged for Schools from Liddell and\n Scott\u2019s_ Greek-English Lexicon.\n\n _Fourteenth Edition. Square 12mo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_An English-Greek Lexicon, containing all the Greek Words used by\n Writers of good authority._\n\n _By C.D. Yonge, M.A._\n\n _New Edition. 4to. 21s._\n\n_Mr. C.D. Yonge\u2019s New Lexicon, English and Greek, abridged from his\n larger Lexicon._\n\n _Square 12mo. 8s. 6d._\n\n_A Latin-English Dictionary._\n\n _By John T. White, D.D. Oxon. and J.E. Riddle, M.A. Oxon._\n\n _Fifth Edition, revised. 1 vol. 4to. 28s._\n\n_Whites College Latin-English Dictionary; abridged from the Parent Work\n for the use of University Students._\n\n _Third Edition, Medium 8vo. 15s._\n\n_A Latin-English Dictionary adapted for the use of Middle-Class\n Schools,_\n\n _By John T. White, D.D. Oxon._\n\n _Square fcp. 8vo. 3s._\n\n_White Junior Student\u2019s Complete Latin-English and English-Latin\n Dictionary._\n\n _Square 12mo. 12s._\n\n _Separately_ { ENGLISH-LATIN, _5s. 6d._\n { LATIN-ENGLISH, _7s. 6d._\n\n_M\u201bCulloch\u2019s Dictionary, Practical Theoretical and Historical of\n Commerce and Commercial Navigation._\n\n _Edited by H.G. Reid._\n\n _8vo. 63s._\n _Supplement, price 5s._\n\n\n_A General Dictionary of Geography, Descriptive, Physical, Statistical,\n and Historical; forming a complete Gazetteer of the World._\n\n _By A. Keith Johnston._\n\n _New Edition, thoroughly revised._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n_The Public Schools Manual of Modern Geography. Forming a Companion to\n \u2018The Public Schools Atlas of Modern Geography.\u2019_\n\n _By Rev. G. Butler, M.A._\n\n _In the press._\n\n_The Public Schools Atlas of Modern Geography. In 31 Maps, exhibiting\n clearly the more important Physical Features of the Countries\n delineated._\n\n _Edited, with Introduction, by Rev. G. Butler, M.A._\n\n _Imperial 8vo. price 5s. cloth; or in imperial 4to. 3s. 6d. sewed &\n 5s. cloth._\n\n_The Public Schools Atlas of Ancient Geography._\n\n _Edited, with an Introduction on the Study of Ancient Geography, by\n the Rev. G. Butler, M.A._\n\n _Imperial Quarto._\n\n _In the press._\n\n ------------------\n\n ASTRONOMY and METEOROLOGY.\n\n_The Universe and the Coming Transits; Researches into and New Views\n respecting the Constitution of the Heavens._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _With 22 Charts and 22 Diagrams. 8vo. 16s._\n\n_Saturn and its System._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _8vo. with 14 Plates, 14s._\n\n_The Transits of Venus; A Popular Account of Past and Coming Transits,\n from the first observed by Horrocks A.D. 1639 to the Transit of A.D.\n 2012._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _Second Edition, revised and enlarged, with 20 Plates (12 Coloured)\n and 27 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d._\n\n_Essays on Astronomy. A Series of Papers on Planets and Meteors, the Sun\n and Sun-surrounding Space, Stars and Star Cloudlets._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _With 10 Plates and 24 Woodcuts. 8vo. 12s._\n\n_The Moon; her Motions, Aspect, Scenery, and Physical Condition._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _With Plates, Charts, Woodcuts, and Lunar Photographs. Crown 8vo.\n 15s._\n\n_The Sun; Ruler, Light, Fire, and Life of the Planetary System._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _Second Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. Cr. 8vo. 14s._\n\n\n_The Orbs Around Us; a Series of Familiar Essays on the Moon and\n Planets, Meteors and Comets, the Sun and Coloured Pairs of Suns._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _Second Edition, with Chart and 4 Diagrams. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Other Worlds than Ours; The Plurality of Worlds Studied under the Light\n of Recent Scientific Researches._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _Third Edition, with 14 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_Brinkley\u2019s Astronomy. Revised and partly re-written, with Additional\n Chapters, and an Appendix of Questions for Examination._\n\n _By John W. Stubbs, D.D. and F. Brunnow, Ph.D._\n\n _With 49 Diagrams. Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Outlines of Astronomy._\n\n _By Sir J.F.W. Herschel, Bart. M.A._\n\n _Latest Edition, with Plates and Diagrams. Square crown 8vo. 12s._\n\n_The Moon, and the Condition and Configurations of its Surface._\n\n _By Edmund Neison, Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society &c._\n\n _Illustrated by Maps and Plates._\n\n [_Nearly ready._\n\n_Celestial Objects for Common Telescopes._\n\n _By T.W. Webb, M.A. F.R.A.S._\n\n _New Edition, with Map of the Moon and Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n \u2018By universal consent of observers in this country, Mr. WEBB\u2019S\n _Celestial Objects_ has taken the place of a standard text-book. With\n a book so well known and so highly appreciated, we have little more to\n do than to mention the appearance of a new edition, which we know has\n been wanted for some time, and which those who survey the glories of\n the heavens will be anxious to obtain.\u2019\n\n The STUDENT.\n\n_A New Star Atlas, for the Library, the School, and the Observatory, in\n 12 Circular Maps (with 2 Index Plates)._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Larger Star Atlas, for the Library, in Twelve Circular Maps,\n photolithographed by A. Brothers, F.R.A.S. With 2 Index Plates and a\n Letterpress Introduction._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _Second Edition. Small folio, 25s._\n\n_Dove\u2019s Law of Storms, considered in connexion with the ordinary\n Movements of the Atmosphere._\n\n _Translated by R.H. Scott, M.A._\n\n _8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n\n_Air and Rain; the Beginnings of a Chemical Climatology._\n\n _By R.A. Smith, F.R.S._\n\n _8vo. 24s._\n\n_Air and its Relations to Life, 1774\u20131874; a Course of Lectures\n delivered at the Royal Institution of Great Britain in 1874, with some\n Additions._\n\n _By Walter Noel Hartley, F.C.S. Demonstrator of Chemistry at King\u2019s\n College, London._\n\n _Small 8vo. with Illustrations, 6s._\n\n_Nautical Surveying, an Introduction to the Practical and Theoretical\n Study of._\n\n _By J.K. Laughton, M.A._\n\n _Small 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Schellen\u2019s Spectrum Analysis, in its Application to Terrestrial\n Substances and the Physical Constitution of the Heavenly Bodies._\n\n _Translated by Jane and C. Lassell; edited, with Notes, by W. Huggins,\n L.L.D. F.R.S._\n\n _With 13 Plates and 223 Woodcuts. 8vo. 28s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n NATURAL HISTORY and PHYSICAL SCIENCE.\n\n_Professor Helmholtz\u2019 Popular Lectures on Scientific Subjects._\n\n _Translated by E. Atkinson, F.C.S._\n\n _With many Illustrative Wood Engravings. 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_Ganot\u2019s Natural Philosophy for General Readers and Young Persons; a\n Course of Physics divested of Mathematical Formul\u00e6 and expressed in\n the language of daily life._\n\n _Translated by E. Atkinson, F.C.S._\n\n _Second Edition, with 2 Plates and 429 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Correlation of Physical Forces._\n\n _By the Hon. Sir W.R. Grove, F.R.S. &c._\n\n _Sixth Edition, with other Contributions to Science. 8vo. 15s._\n\n_Weinhold\u2019s Introduction to Experimental Physics, Theoretical and\n Practical; including Directions for Constructing Physical Apparatus\n and for Making Experiments._\n\n _Translated by B. Loewy, F.R.A.S. With a Preface by G.C. Foster,\n F.R.S._\n\n _With 3 Coloured Plates and 404 Woodcuts. 8vo. price 31s. 6d._\n\n\n_Ganot\u2019s Elementary Treatise on Physics, Experimental and Applied, for\n the use of Colleges and Schools._\n\n _Translated and edited by E. Atkinson, F.C.S._\n\n _Seventh Edition, with 4 Coloured Plates & 758 Woodcuts. Post 8vo.\n 15s._\n\n \u2042 _Problems and Examples in Physics, an Appendix to the Seventh and\n other Editions of Ganot\u2019s Elementary Treatise._ _8vo. price 1s._\n\n_Text-Books of Science, Mechanical and Physical, adapted for the use of\n Artisans and of Students in Public and Science Schools._\n\n _Small 8vo. Woodcuts._\n\n _The following Text-Books in this Series may now be had:\u2014_\n\n Anderson\u2019s _Strength of Materials_, _3s. 6d._\n Armstrong\u2019s _Organic Chemistry_, _3s. 6d._\n Barry\u2019s _Railway Appliances_, _3s. 6d._\n Bloxam\u2019s _Metals_, _3s. 6d._\n Goodeve\u2019s _Mechanics_, _3s. 6d._\n \u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014 _Mechanism_, _3s. 6d._\n Griffin\u2019s _Algebra & Trigonometry_, _3s. 6d._\n _Notes on the same, with Solutions_, _3s. 6d._\n Jenkin\u2019s _Electricity & Magnetism_, _3s. 6d._\n Maxwell\u2019s _Theory of Heat_, _3s. 6d._\n Merrifield\u2019s _Technical Arithmetic_, _3s. 6d._\n _Key_, _3s. 6d._\n Miller\u2019s _Inorganic Chemistry_, _3s. 6d._\n Preece and Sivewright\u2019s Telegraphy, _3s. 6d._\n Shelley\u2019s Workshop Appliances, _3s. 6d._\n Thorpe\u2019s _Quantitative Analysis_, _4s. 6d._\n Thorpe _and_ Muir\u2019s _Qualitative Analysis_, _3s. 6d._\n Watson\u2019s _Plane & Solid Geometry_, _3s. 6d._\n\n \u2042 _Other Text-Books, in extension of this Series, in active\n preparation._\n\n_Principles of Animal Mechanics._\n\n _By the Rev. S. Haughton, F.R.S._\n\n _Second Edition. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Fragments of Science._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _New Edition, crown 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_Heat a Mode of Motion._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _Fifth Edition, Plate and Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_Sound._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _Third Edition, including Recent Researches on Fog-Signalling;\n Portrait and Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_Researches on Diamagnetism and Magne-Crystallic Action; including\n Diamagnetic Polarity._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _With 6 Plates and many Woodcuts. 8vo. 14s._\n\n_Contributions to Molecular Physics in the domain of Radiant Heat._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _With 2 Plates and 31 Woodcuts. 8vo. 16s._\n\n_Six Lectures on Light, delivered in America in 1872 and 1873._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _Second Edition, with Portrait, Plate, and 59 Diagrams. Crown 8vo. 7s.\n 6d._\n\n\n_Notes of a Course of Nine Lectures on Light, delivered at the Royal\n Institution._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 1s. sewed, or 1s. 6d. cloth._\n\n_Notes of a Course of Seven Lectures on Electrical Phenomena and\n Theories, delivered at the Royal Institution._\n\n _By John Tyndall, F.R.S._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 1s. sewed, or 1s. 6d. cloth._\n\n_A Treatise on Magnetism, General and Terrestrial._\n\n _By H. Lloyd, D.D. D.C.L._\n\n _8vo. price 10s. 6d._\n\n_Elementary Treatise on the Wave-Theory of Light._\n\n _By H. Lloyd, D.D. D.C.L._\n\n _Third Edition. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Comparative Anatomy and Physiology of the Vertebrate Animals._\n\n _By Richard Owen, F.R.S._\n\n _With 1,472 Woodcuts, 3 vols. 8vo. \u00a33. 13s. 6d._\n\n_Sir H. Holland\u2019s Fragmentary Papers on Science and other subjects._\n\n _Edited by the Rev. J. Holland._\n\n _8vo. price 14s._\n\n_Kirby and Spence\u2019s Introduction to Entomology, or Elements of the\n Natural History of Insects._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Light Science for Leisure Hours; Familiar Essays on Scientific\n Subjects, Natural Phenomena, &c._\n\n _By R.A. Proctor, B.A._\n\n _First and Second Series. 2 vols. crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. each._\n\n_Homes without Hands; a Description of the Habitations of Animals,\n classed according to their Principle of Construction._\n\n _By Rev. J.G. Wood, M.A._\n\n _With about 140 Vignettes on Wood. 8vo. 14s._\n\n_Strange Dwellings; a Description of the Habitations of Animals,\n abridged from \u2018Homes without Hands.\u2019_\n\n _By Rev. J.G. Wood, M.A._\n\n _With Frontispiece and 60 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Insects at Home; a Popular Account of British Insects, their Structure\n Habits, and Transformations._\n\n _By Rev. J.G. Wood, M.A._\n\n _With upwards of 700 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Insects Abroad; being a Popular Account of Foreign Insects, their\n Structure, Habits, and Transformations._\n\n _By Rev. J.G. Wood, M.A._\n\n _With upwards of 700 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s._\n\n\n_Out of Doors; a Selection of Original Articles on Practical Natural\n History._\n\n _By Rev. J.G. Wood, M.A._\n\n _With 6 Illustrations from Original Designs engraved on Wood. Crown\n 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Bible Animals; a Description of every Living Creature mentioned in the\n Scriptures, from the Ape to the Coral._\n\n _By Rev. J.G. Wood, M.A._\n\n _With about 112 Vignettes on Wood. 8vo. 14s._\n\n_The Polar World: a Popular Description of Man and Nature in the Arctic\n and Antarctic Regions of the Globe._\n\n _By Dr. G. Hartwig._\n\n _With Chromoxylographs, Maps, and Woodcuts. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Sea and its Living Wonders._\n\n _By Dr. G. Hartwig._\n\n _Fourth Edition, enlarged. 8vo. with many Illustrations, 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Tropical World._\n\n _By Dr. G. Hartwig._\n\n _With about 200 Illustrations. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Subterranean World._\n\n _By Dr. G. Hartwig._\n\n _With Maps and Woodcuts. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_The Aerial World; a Popular Account of the Phenomena and Life of the\n Atmosphere._\n\n _By Dr. George Hartwig._\n\n _With Map, 8 Chromoxylographs, and 60 Woodcuts. 8vo. price 21s._\n\n_Game Preservers and Bird Preservers, or \u2018Which are our Friends?\u2019_\n\n _By George Francis Morant, late Captain 12th Royal Lancers & Major\n Cape Mounted Riflemen._\n\n _Crown 8vo. price 5s._\n\n_A Familiar History of Birds._\n\n _By E. Stanley, D.D. late Ld. Bishop of Norwich._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with Woodcuts, 3s. 6d._\n\n_Rocks Classified and Described._\n\n _By B. Von Cotta._\n\n _English Edition, by P.H. LAWRENCE (with English, German, and French\n Synonymes), revised by the Author. Post 8vo. 14s._\n\n_Excavations at the Kesslerloch near Thayngen, Switzerland, a Cave of\n the Reindeer Period._\n\n _By Conrad Merk. Translated by John Edward Lee, F.S.A. F.G.S. Author\n of \u2018Isca Silurum\u2019 &c._\n\n _With Sixteen Plates. Royal 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Origin of Civilisation, and the Primitive Condition of Man; Mental\n and Social Condition of Savages._\n\n _By Sir J. Lubbock, Bart. M.P. F.R.S._\n\n _Third Edition, with 25 Woodcuts. 8vo. 18s._\n\n\n_The Native Races of the Pacific States of North America._\n\n _By Hubert Howe Bancroft._\n\n_Vol. I. Wild Tribes, their Manners and Customs; with 6 Maps. 8vo. 25s._\n\n_Vol. II. Native Races of the Pacific States. 8vo. 25s._\n\n_Vol. III. Myths and Languages. 8vo. price 25s._\n\n_Vol. IV. Antiquities and Architectural Remains, with Map. 8vo. 25s._\n\n_Vol. V. Aboriginal History and Migrations; Index to the Entire Work.\n With 2 Maps, 8vo. 25s._\n\n\u2042 _This work may now be had complete in 5 volumes, price \u00a36. 5s._\n\n_The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons, and Ornaments of Great Britain._\n\n _By John Evans, F.R.S._\n\n _With 2 Plates and 476 Woodcuts. 8vo. 28s._\n\n_The Elements of Botany for Families and Schools._\n\n _Eleventh Edition, revised by Thomas Moore, F.L.S._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. with 154 Woodcuts, 2s. 6d._\n\n_The Rose Amateur\u2019s Guide._\n\n _By Thomas Rivers._\n\n _Tenth Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 4s._\n\n_On the Sensations of Tone, as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of\n Music._\n\n _By H. Helmholtz, Professor of Physiology in the University of\n Berlin._\n\n _Translated by A.J. Ellis, F.R.S._\n\n _8vo. 36s._\n\n_A Dictionary of Science, Literature, and Art._\n\n _Re-edited by the late W.T. Brande (the Author) and Rev. G.W. Cox,\n M.A._\n\n _New Edition, revised. 3 vols. medium 8vo. 63s._\n\n_The History of Modern Music, a Course of Lectures delivered at the\n Royal Institution of Great Britain._\n\n _By John Hullah._\n\n _New Edition. Demy 8vo. 8s. 6d._\n\n_The Transition Period of Musical History; a Second Course of Lectures\n on the History of Music from the Beginning of the Seventeenth to the\n Middle of the Eighteenth Century, delivered at the Royal Institution._\n\n _By John Hullah._\n\n _New Edition, 1 vol. demy 8vo._\n\n [_In the Spring._\n\n_The Treasury of Botany, or Popular Dictionary of the Vegetable Kingdom;\n with which is incorporated a Glossary of Botanical Terms._\n\n _Edited by J. Lindley, F.R.S. and T. Moore, F.L.S._\n\n _With 274 Woodcuts and 20 Steel Plates. Two Parts, fcp. 8vo. 12s._\n\n\n_A General System of Descriptive and Analytical Botany._\n\n _Translated from the French of Le Maout and Decaisne, by Mrs. Hooker.\n Edited and arranged according to the English Botanical System, by J.\n D. Hooker, M.D. &c. Director of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew._\n\n _With 5,500 Woodcuts. Imperial 8vo. 31s. 6d._\n\n_Loudon\u2019s Encyclopedia of Plants; comprising the Specific Character,\n Description, Culture, History, &c. of all the Plants found in Great\n Britain._\n\n _With upwards of 12,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 42s._\n\n_Handbook of Hardy Trees, Shrubs, and Herbaceous Plants; containing\n Descriptions &c. of the Best Species in Cultivation; with Cultural\n Details, Comparative Hardiness, suitability for particular positions,\n &c. Based on the French Work of Decaisne and Naudin, and including the\n 720 Original Woodcut Illustrations._\n\n _By W.B. Hemsley._\n\n _Medium 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Forest Trees and Woodland Scenery, as described in Ancient and Modern\n Poets._\n\n _By William Menzies, Deputy Surveyor of Windsor Forest and Parks, &c._\n\n _With Twenty Chromolithographic Plates. Folio, price \u00a35. 5s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n CHEMISTRY and PHYSIOLOGY.\n\n_Miller\u2019s Elements of Chemistry, Theoretical and Practical._\n\n _Re-edited, with Additions, by H. Macleod, F.C.S._\n\n _3 vols. 8vo._\n\n PART I. CHEMICAL PHYSICS, 15s.\n PART II. INORGANIC CHEMISTRY, 21s.\n PART III. ORGANIC CHEMISTRY, _New\n Edition in the press_.\n\n_Health in the House, Twenty-five Lectures on Elementary Physiology in\n its Application to the Daily Wants of Man and Animals._\n\n _By Mrs. C.M. Buckton._\n\n _New Edition. Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 2s._\n\n\n_Outlines of Physiology, Human and Comparative. By J. Marshall,\n F.R.C.S._\n\n _Surgeon to the University College Hospital._\n\n _2 vols. cr. 8vo. with 122 Woodcuts, 32s._\n\n_Select Methods in Chemical Analysis, chiefly Inorganic._\n\n _By Wm. Crookes, F.R.S._\n\n _With 22 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_A Dictionary of Chemistry and the Allied Branches of other Sciences._\n\n _By Henry Watts, F.C.S. assisted by eminent Scientific and Practical\n Chemists._\n\n _6 vols, medium 8vo. \u00a38. 14s. 6d._\n\n_Supplement completing the Record of Discovery to the year 1873._\n\n _8vo. price 42s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n The FINE ARTS and ILLUSTRATION\n EDITIONS.\n\n_Poems._\n\n _By William B. Scott._\n\n _I. Ballads and Tales. II. Studies from Nature. III. Sonnets &c._\n\n _Illustrated by Seventeen Etchings by_ L. Alma Tadema _and_ William B.\n Scott. _Crown 8vo. 15s._\n\n_Half-hour Lectures on the History and Practice of the Fine and\n Ornamental Arts._\n\n _By W.B. Scott._\n\n _Third Edition, with 50 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d._\n\n_A Dictionary of Artists of the English School: Painters, Sculptors,\n Architects, Engravers, and Ornamentists; with Notices of their Lives\n and Works._\n\n _By Samuel Redgrave._\n\n _8vo. 16s._\n\n_In Fairyland; Pictures from the Elf-World. By Richard Doyle. With a\n Poem by W. Allingham._\n\n _With 16 coloured Plates, containing 36 Designs. Second Edition,\n folio, 15s._\n\n_The New Testament, illustrated with Wood Engravings after the Early\n Masters, chiefly of the Italian School._\n\n _Crown 4to. 63s._\n\n_Lord Macaulay\u2019s Lays of Ancient Rome. With 90 Illustrations on Wood\n from Drawings by G. Scharf._\n\n _Fcp. 4to. 21s._\n\n_Miniature Edition, with Scharf\u2019s 90 Illustrations reduced in\n Lithography._\n\n _Imp. 16mo. 10s. 6d._\n\n\n_Moore\u2019s Irish Melodies, Maclise\u2019s Edition, with 161 Steel Plates._\n\n _Super royal 8vo. 31s. 6d._\n\n_Sacred and Legendary Art._\n\n _By Mrs. Jameson._\n\n _6 vols, square crown 8vo. price \u00a35. 15s. 6d. as follows:\u2014_\n\n_Legends of the Saints and Martyrs._\n\n _New Edition, with 19 Etchings and 187 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 31s. 6d._\n\n_Legends of the Monastic Orders._\n\n _New Edition, with 11 Etchings and 88 Woodcuts. 1 vol. 21s._\n\n_Legends of the Madonna._\n\n _New Edition, with 27 Etchings and 165 Woodcuts. 1 vol. 21s._\n\n_The History of Our Lord, with that of his Types and Precursors._\n\n _Completed by Lady Eastlake._\n\n _Revised Edition, with 13 Etchings and 281 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 42s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n The USEFUL ARTS, MANUFACTURES, &c.\n\n_Industrial Chemistry; a Manual for Manufacturers and for Colleges or\n Technical Schools. Being a Translation of Professors Stohmann and\n Engler\u2019s German Edition of Payen\u2019s \u2018Pr\u00e9cis de Chimie Industrielle,\u2019 by\n Dr. J.D. Barry._\n\n _Edited, and supplemented with Chapters on the Chemistry of the\n Metals, by B.H. Paul, Ph.D._\n\n _8vo. with Plates and Woodcuts._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n_Gwilt\u2019s Encyclop\u00e6dia of Architecture, with above 1,600 Woodcuts._\n\n _New Edition (1876), with Alterations and Additions, by Wyatt\n Papworth._\n\n _8vo. 52s. 6d._\n\n_The Three Cathedrals dedicated to St. Paul in London; their History\n from the Foundation of the First Building in the Sixth Century to the\n Proposals for the Adornment of the Present Cathedral._\n\n _By W. Longman, F.S.A._\n\n _With numerous Illustrations. Square crown 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Lathes and Turning, Simple, Mechanical, and Ornamental._\n\n _By W. Henry Northcott._\n\n _With 240 Illustrations. 8vo. 18s._\n\n_Hints on Household Taste in Furniture, Upholstery, and other Details._\n\n _By Charles L. Eastlake, Architect._\n\n _New Edition, with about 90 Illustrations. Square crown 8vo. 14s._\n\n\n_Handbook of Practical Telegraphy._\n\n _By R.S. Culley, Memb. Inst. C.E. Engineer-in-Chief of Telegraphs to\n the Post-Office._\n\n _Sixth Edition, Plates & Woodcuts. 8vo. 16s._\n\n\n_A Treatise on the Steam Engine, in its various applications to Mines,\n Mills, Steam Navigation, Railways and Agriculture._\n\n _By J. Bourne, C.E._\n\n _With Portrait, 37 Plates, and 546 Woodcuts. 4to. 42s._\n\n\n_Catechism of the Steam Engine, in its various Applications._\n\n _By John Bourne, C.E._\n\n _New Edition, with 89 Woodcuts. Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n\n_Handbook of the Steam Engine._\n\n _By J. Bourne, C.E. forming a_ KEY _to the Author\u2019s Catechism of the\n Steam Engine_.\n\n _With 67 Woodcuts. Fcp. 8vo. 9s._\n\n\n_Recent Improvements in the Steam Engine._\n\n _By J. Bourne, C.E._\n\n _With 124 Woodcuts. Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Encyclop\u00e6dia of Civil Engineering, Historical, Theoretical, and\n Practical._\n\n _By E. Cresy, C.E._\n\n _With above 3,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 42s._\n\n_Ure\u2019s Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, and Mines. Seventh Edition,\n re-written and greatly enlarged by R. Hunt, F.R.S. assisted by\n numerous Contributors._\n\n _With 2,100 Woodcuts. 3 vols. medium 8vo. price \u00a35. 5s._\n\n_Practical Treatise on Metallurgy_,\n\n _Adapted from the last German Edition of Professor Kerl\u2019s Metallurgy\n by W. Crookes, F.R.S. &c. and E. R\u00f6hrig, Ph.D._\n\n _3 vols. 8vo. with 625 Woodcuts. \u00a34. 19s._\n\n_Treatise on Mills and Millwork._\n\n _By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt._\n\n _With 18 Plates and 322 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 8vo. 32s._\n\n_Useful Information for Engineers._\n\n _By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt._\n\n _With many Plates and Woodcuts. 3 vols, crown 8vo. 31s. 6d._\n\n_The Application of Cast and Wrought Iron to Building Purposes._\n\n _By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt._\n\n _With 6 Plates and 118 Woodcuts. 8vo. 16s._\n\n\n_The Theory of Strains in Girders and similar Structures, with\n Observations on the application of Theory to Practice, and Tables of\n the Strength and other Properties of Materials._\n\n _By Bindon B. Stoney, M. A. M. Inst. C.E._\n\n _New Edition, royal 8vo. with 5 Plates and 123 Woodcuts, 36s._\n\n_Practical Handbook of Dyeing and Calico-Printing._\n\n _By W.Crookes,F.R.S. &c._\n\n _With numerous Illustrations and Specimens of Dyed Textile Fabrics.\n 8vo. 42s._\n\n_Occasional Papers on Subjects connected with Civil Engineering,\n Gunnery, and Naval Architecture._\n\n _By Michael Scott, Memb. Inst. C.E. & of Inst. N.A._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. with Plates, 42s._\n\n_Mitchell\u2019s Manual of Practical Assaying._\n\n _Fourth Edition, revised, with the Recent Discoveries incorporated, by\n W. Crookes, F.R.S._\n\n _crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 31s. 6d._\n\n_Naval Powers and their Policy: with Tabular Statements of British and\n Foreign Ironclad Navies; giving Dimensions, Armour, Details of\n Armament, Engines, Speed, and other Particulars._\n\n _By John C. Paget._\n\n _8vo. price 10s. 6d. cloth._\n\n_Loudon\u2019s Encyclop\u00e6dia of Gardening; comprising the Theory and Practice\n of Horticulture, Floriculture, Arboriculture, and Landscape\n Gardening._\n\n _With 1,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Loudon\u2019s Encyclop\u00e6dia of Agriculture; comprising the Laying-out,\n Improvement, and Management of Landed Property, and the Cultivation\n and Economy of the Productions of Agriculture._\n\n _With 1,100 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_Reminiscences of Fen and Mere._\n\n _By J.M. Heathcote._\n\n _With 27 Illustrations and 3 Maps. Square 8vo. price 28s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n RELIGIOUS and MORAL WORKS.\n\n_An Exposition of the 39 Articles, Historical and Doctrinal._\n\n _By E.H. Browne, D.D. Bishop of Winchester._\n\n _New Edition. 8vo. 16s._\n\n_Historical Lectures on the Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ._\n\n _By C.J. Ellicott, D.D._\n\n _Fifth Edition. 8vo. 12s._\n\n_An Introduction to the Theology of the Church of England, in an\n Exposition of the 39 Articles. By Rev. T.P. Boultbee, LL.D._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Three Essays on Religion: Nature; the Utility of Religion; Theism._\n\n _By John Stuart Mill._\n\n _Second Edition. 8vo. price 10s. 6d._\n\n_Sermons Chiefly on the Interpretation of Scripture._\n\n _By the late Rev. Thomas Arnold, D.D._\n\n _8vo. price 7s. 6d._\n\n_Sermons preached in the Chapel of Rugby School; with an Address before\n Confirmation._\n\n _By the late Rev. Thomas Arnold, D.D._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. price 3s. 6d._\n\n_Christian Life, its Course, its Hindrances, and its Helps; Sermons\n preached mostly in the Chapel of Rugby School._\n\n _By the late Rev. Thomas Arnold, D.D._\n\n _8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Christian Life, its Hopes, its Fears, and its Close; Sermons preached\n mostly in the Chapel of Rugby School._\n\n _By the late Rev. Thomas Arnold, D.D._\n\n _8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Religion and Science, their Relations to Each Other at the Present Day;\n Three Essays on the Grounds of Religious Beliefs._\n\n _By Stanley T. Gibson, B.D. Rector of Sandon, in Essex; and late\n Fellow of Queen\u2019s College, Cambridge._\n\n _8vo. price 10s. 6d._\n\n_Notes on the Earlier Hebrew Scriptures._\n\n _By Sir G.B. Airy, K.C.B._\n\n _8vo. price 6s._\n\n_Synonyms of the Old Testament, their Bearing on Christian Faith and\n Practice._\n\n _By Rev. R.B. Girdlestone._\n\n _8vo. 15s._\n\n\n_The Primitive and Catholic Faith in Relation to the Church of England._\n\n _By the Rev. B.W. Savile, M.A. Rector of Shillingford, Exeter._\n\n _8vo. price 7s._\n\n_The Eclipse of Faith: or a Visit to a Religious Sceptic._\n\n _By Henry Rogers._\n\n _Latest Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Defence of the Eclipse of Faith._\n\n _By Henry Rogers._\n\n _Latest Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul\u2019s Epistles._\n\n _By C.J. Ellicott, D.D._\n\n _8vo._ Galatians, _8s. 6d._ Ephesians, _8s. 6d._ Pastoral Epistles,\n _10s. 6d._ Philippians, Colossians, & Philemon, _10s. 6d._\n Thessalonians, _7s. 6d._\n\n_The Life and Epistles of St. Paul._\n\n _By Rev. W.J. Conybeare, M.A. and Very Rev. J. S. Howson, D.D._\n\n LIBRARY EDITION, _with all the Original Illustrations, Maps,\n Landscapes on Steel, Woodcuts, &c. 2 vols. 4to. 42s._\n\n INTERMEDIATE EDITION, _with a Selection of Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts.\n 2 vols. square crown 8vo. 21s._\n\n STUDENT\u2019S EDITION, _revised and condensed, with 46 Illustrations and\n Maps. 1 vol. crown 8vo. 9s._\n\n_An Examination into the Doctrine and Practice of Confession._\n\n _By the Rev. W.E. Jelf, B.D._\n\n _8vo. price 3s. 6d._\n\n_Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion derived from the\n Literal Fulfilment of Prophecy._\n\n _By Alexander Keith, D.D._\n\n _40th Edition, with numerous Plates. Square 8vo. 12s. 6d. or in post\n 8vo. with 5 Plates, 6s._\n\n_Historical and Critical Commentary on the Old Testament; with a New\n Translation._\n\n _By M.M. Kalisch, Ph.D._\n\n_Vol. I._ Genesis, _8vo. 18s. or adapted for the General Reader, 12s._\n _Vol. II._ Exodus, _15s. or adapted for the General Reader, 12s._\n _Vol. III._ Leviticus, _Part I. 15s. or adapted for the General\n Reader, 8s._ _Vol. IV._ Leviticus, _Part II. 15s. or adapted for the\n General Reader, 8s._\n\n_The History and Literature of the Israelites, according to the Old\n Testament and the Apocrypha._\n\n _By C. De Rothschild and A. De Rothschild._\n\n_Second Edition. 2 vols. crown 8vo. 12s. 6d. Abridged Edition, in 1 vol.\n fcp. 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Ewald\u2019s History of Israel._\n\n _Translated from the German by J.E. Carpenter, M.A. with Preface by R.\n Martineau, M.A._\n\n _5 vols. 8vo. 63s._\n\n\n_Ewald\u2019s Antiquities of Israel._\n\n _Translated from the German by Henry Shaen Solly, M.A._\n\n _8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_The Types of Genesis, briefly considered as revealing the Development\n of Human Nature._\n\n _By Andrew Jukes._\n\n _Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Second Death and the Restitution of all Things; with some\n Preliminary Remarks on the Nature and Inspiration of Holy Scripture._\n\n _By Andrew Jukes._\n\n _Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_History of the Reformation in Europe in the time of Calvin._\n\n _By the Rev. J.H. Merle D\u2019Aubign\u00e9, D.D. Translated by W.L.R. Cates,\n Editor of the Dictionary of General Biography._\n\n _6 vols. 8vo. price \u00a34. 10s._\n\n \u2042 VOLS. VII. & VIII. _completing the Work, are preparing for\n publication_.\n\n_Commentaries, by the Rev. W.A. O'Conor, B.A. Rector of St. Simon and\n St. Jude, Manchester._\n\n _Crown 8vo._\n\n _Epistle to the Romans, price 3s. 6d._\n _Epistle to the Hebrews, 4s. 6d._\n _St. John\u2019s Gospel, 10s. 6d._\n\n_Some Questions of the Day._\n\n _By Elizabeth M. Sewell, Author of \u2018Amy Herbert,\u2019 \u2018Passing Thoughts on\n Religion,\u2019 &c._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d._\n\n_An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament, Critical,\n Exegetical, and Theological._\n\n _By the Rev. S. Davidson, D.D. LL.D._\n\n _2 vols. 8vo. price 30s._\n\n_Thoughts for the Age._\n\n _By Elizabeth M. Sewell._\n\n _New Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Preparation for the Holy Communion; the Devotions chiefly from the\n works of Jeremy Taylor._\n\n _By Elizabeth M. Sewell._\n\n _32mo. 3s._\n\n_Bishop Jeremy Taylor\u2019s Entire Works; with Life by Bishop Heber._\n\n _Revised and corrected by the Rev. C.P. Eden._\n\n _10 vols. \u00a35. 5s._\n\n_Hymns of Praise and Prayer._\n\n _Collected and edited by Rev. J. Martineau, LL.D._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 32mo. 1s. 6d._\n\n\n_Spiritual Songs for the Sundays and Holidays throughout the Year._\n\n _By J.S.B. Monsell, LL.D._\n\n _9th Thousand. Fcp. 8vo. 5s. 18mo. 2s._\n\n_Lyra Germanica; Hymns translated from the German by Miss C. Winkworth._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Lectures on the Pentateuch & the Moabite Stone; with Appendices._\n\n _By J.W. Colenso, D.D. Bishop of Natal._\n\n _8vo. 12s._\n\n_Endeavours after the Christian Life; Discourses._\n\n _By Rev. J. Martineau, LL.D._\n\n _Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n _Supernatural Religion; an Inquiry into the Reality of Divine\n Revelation._\n\n _Sixth Edition carefully revised, with 80 pages of New Preface. 2\n vols. 8vo. 24s._\n\n _The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua Critically Examined._\n\n _By J.W. Colenso, D.D. Bishop of Natal._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n TRAVELS, VOYAGES, &c.\n\n_The Indian Alps, and How we Crossed them: being a Narrative of Two\n Years\u2019 Residence in the Eastern Himalayas, and Two Months\u2019 Tour into\n the Interior, towards Kinchinjunga and Mount Everest._\n\n _By a Lady Pioneer._\n\n _With Illustrations from Original Drawings made on the spot by the\n Authoress. Imperial 8vo. 42s._\n\n_Tyrol and the Tyrolese; being an Account of the People and the Land, in\n their Social, Sporting, and Mountaineering Aspects._\n\n _By W.A. Baillie Grohman._\n\n _With numerous Illustrations from Sketches by the Author. Crown 8vo.\n 14s._\n\n_\u2018The Frosty Caucasus;\u2019 an Account of a Walk through Part of the Range,\n and of an Ascent of Elbruz in the Summer of 1874._\n\n _By F.C. Grove._\n\n _With Eight Illustrations engraved on Wood by E. Whymper, from\n Photographs taken during the Journey, and a Map. Crown 8vo. price\n 15s._\n\n_A Journey of 1,000 Miles through Egypt and Nubia to the Second Cataract\n of the Nile. Being a Personal Narrative of Four and a Half Months\u2019\n Life in a Dahabeeyah on the Nile._\n\n _By Amelia B. Edwards._\n\n _With numerous Illustrations from Drawings by the Authoress, Map,\n Plans, Facsimiles, &c. Imperial 8vo._\n\n [_In the Autumn._\n\n\n_Over the Sea and Far Away; being a Narrative of a Ramble round the\n World._\n\n _By Thos. Woodbine Hinchliff, M.A. F.R.G.S. President of the Alpine\n Club, Author of \u2018Summer Months among the Alps,\u2019 &c._\n\n _1 vol. medium 8vo. with numerous Illustrations._\n\n [_Nearly ready._\n\n_Discoveries at Ephesus. Including the Site and Remains of the Great\n Temple of Diana._\n\n _By J.T. Wood, F.S.A._\n\n _1 vol. imperial 8vo. copiously illustrated._\n\n _[In the press._\n\n_Through Bosnia and the Herzegovina on Foot during the Insurrection,\n August and September 1875; with a Glimpse at the Slavonic Borderlands\n of Turkey._\n\n _By Arthur J. Evans, B.A. F.S.A._\n\n _Post 8vo. with Map and numerous Illustrations._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n_Italian Alps; Sketches in the Mountains of Ticino, Lombardy, the\n Trentino, and Venetia._\n\n _By Douglas W. Freshfield, Editor of \u2018The Alpine Journal.\u2019_\n\n _Square crown 8vo. Illustrations. 15s._\n\n_Memorials of the Discovery and Early Settlement of the Bermudas or\n Somers Islands, from 1615 to 1685. Compiled from the Colonial Records\n and other original sources._\n\n _By Major-General J.H. Lefroy, R.A. C.B. F.R.S. Hon. Member New York\n Historical Society, &c. Governor of the Bermudas._\n\n _8vo. with Map._\n\n [_In the press._\n\n_Here and There in the Alps._\n\n _By the Hon. Frederica Plunket._\n\n _With Vignette-title. Post 8vo. 6s. 6d._\n\n_The Valleys of Tirol; their Traditions and Customs, and How to Visit\n them._\n\n _By Miss R.H. Busk._\n\n _With Frontispiece and 3 Maps. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_Two Years in Fiji, a Descriptive Narrative of a Residence in the Fijian\n Group of Islands; with some Account of the Fortunes of Foreign\n Settlers and Colonists up to the time of British Annexation._\n\n _By Litton Forbes, M.D._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d._\n\n\n_Eight Years in Ceylon._\n\n _By Sir Samuel W. Baker, M.A. F.R.G.S._\n\n _New Edition, with Illustrations engraved on Wood by G. Pearson. Crown\n 8vo. Price 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Rifle and the Hound in Ceylon._\n\n _By Sir Samuel W. Baker, M.A. F.R.G.S._\n\n _New Edition, with Illustrations engraved on Wood by G. Pearson. Crown\n 8vo. Price 7s. 6d._\n\n_Meeting the Sun; a Journey all round the World through Egypt, China,\n Japan, and California._\n\n _By William Simpson, F.R.G.S._\n\n _With Heliotypes and Woodcuts. 8vo. 24s._\n\n_The Dolomite Mountains. Excursions through Tyrol, Carinthia, Carniola,\n and Friuli._\n\n _By J. Gilbert and G.C. Churchill, F.R.G.S._\n\n _With Illustrations. Sq. cr. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_The Alpine Club Map of the Chain of Mont Blanc, from an actual Survey\n in 1863\u20131864._\n\n _By A. Adams-Reilly, F.R.G.S. M.A.C._\n\n _In Chromolithography, on extra stout drawing paper 10s. or mounted on\n canvas in a folding case, 12s. 6d._\n\n_The Alpine Club Map of the Valpelline, the Val Tournanche, and the\n Southern Valleys of the Chain of Monte Rosa, from actual Survey._\n\n _By A. Adams-Reilly, F.R.G.S. M.A.C._\n\n _Price 6s. on extra Stout Drawing Paper, or 7s. 6d. mounted in a\n Folding Case._\n\n_Untrodden Peaks and Unfrequented Valleys; a Midsummer Ramble among the\n Dolomites._\n\n _By Amelia B. Edwards._\n\n _With numerous Illustrations. 8vo. 21s._\n\n_The Alpine Club Map of Switzerland, with parts of the Neighbouring\n Countries, on the scale of Four Miles to an Inch._\n\n _Edited by R.C. Nichols, F.S.A. F.R.G.S._\n\n _In Four Sheets, in Portfolio, price 42s. coloured, or 34s.\n uncoloured._\n\n_The Alpine Guide._\n\n _By John Ball, M.R.I.A. late President of the Alpine Club._\n\n _Post 8vo. with Maps and other Illustrations._\n\n _Eastern Alps._\n\n _Price 10s. 6d._\n\n _Central Alps, including all the Oberland District._\n\n _Price 7s. 6d._\n\n\n_Western Alps, including, Mont Blanc, Monte Rosa, Zermatt, &c._\n\n _Price 6s. 6d._\n\n_Introduction on Alpine Travelling in general, and on the Geology of the\n Alps._\n\n _Price 1s. Either of the Three Volumes or Parts of the \u2018Alpine Guide\u2019\n may be had with this Introduction prefixed, 1s. extra. The \u2018Alpine\n Guide\u2019 may also be had in_ Ten _separate_ Parts, _or districts,\n price 2s. 6d. each_.\n\n_Guide to the Pyrenees, for the use of Mountaineers._\n\n _By Charles Packe._\n\n _Second Edition, with Maps &c. and Appendix. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_How to See Norway; embodying the Experience of Six Summer Tours in that\n Country._\n\n _By J.R. Campbell._\n\n _With Map and 5 Woodcuts, fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n ------------------\n\n WORKS of FICTION.\n\n_Higgledy-Piggledy; or, Stories for Everybody and Everybody\u2019s Children._\n\n _By the Right Hon. E.H. Knatchbull-Hugessen, M.P. Author of \u2018Whispers\n from Fairyland\u2019 &c._\n\n_With 9 Illustrations from Original Designs by R. Doyle, engraved on\n Wood by G. Pearson. Crown 8vo. price 6s._\n\n\n_Whispers from Fairyland._\n\n_By the Rt. Hon. E.H. Knatchbull-Hugessen, M.P. Author of\n \u2018Higgledy-Piggledy\u2019 &c._\n\n_With 9 Illustrations from Original Designs engraved on Wood by G.\n Pearson. Crown 8vo. price 6s._\n\n\u2018A series of stories which are certain of a ready welcome by all boys\nand girls who take delight in dreamland, and love to linger over the\npranks and frolics of fairies. The book is dedicated to the mothers of\nEngland, and more wholesome food for the growing mind it would be\nunreasonable to desire, and impossible to procure.... This welcome\nvolume abounds in vivacity and fun, and bears pleasant testimony to a\nkindly-hearted Author with fancy, feeling, and humour.\u2019 MORNING POST.\n\n_The Folk-Lore of Rome, collected by Word of Mouth from the People._\n\n _By Miss R.H. Busk._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_Becker\u2019s Gallus; or Roman Scenes of the Time of Augustus._\n\n _Post 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Becker\u2019s Charicles: Illustrative of Private Life of the Ancient\n Greeks._\n\n _Post 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_Novels and Tales._\n\n_By the Right Hon. Benjamin Disraeli, M.P._\n\n _Cabinet Editions, complete in Ten Volumes, crown 8vo. 6s. each, as\n follows:\u2014_\n\n _Lothair, 6s._\n _Coningsby, 6s._\n _Sybil, 6s._\n _Tancred, 6s._\n _Venetia, 6s._\n _Alroy, Ixion, &c. 6s._\n _Young Duke, &c. 6s._\n _Vivian Grey, 6s._\n _Henrietta Temple, 6s._\n _Contarini Fleming, &c. 6s._\n\n\n_The Modern Novelist\u2019s Library._\n\n_Atherstone Priory, 2s. boards; 2s. 6d. cloth._\n_Mlle. Mori, 2s. boards; 2s. 6d. cloth._\n_The Burgomaster\u2019s Family, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\nMELVILLE\u2019S _Digby Grand, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _Gladiators, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _Good for Nothing, 2s. & 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _Holmby House, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _Interpreter, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _Kate Coventry, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _Queens Maries, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\n\u2014\u2014 _General Bounce, 2s. and 2s. 6d._\nTROLLOPE\u2019S _Warden, 1s. 6d. and 2s._\n\u2014\u2014 _Barchester Towers, 2s. & 2s. 6d._\nBRAMLEY-MOORE\u2019S _Six Sisters of the Valleys,\n2s. boards; 2s. 6d. cloth._\n_Elsa: a Tale of the Tyrolean Alps. Translated\nfrom the German of Mme. Von\nHillern by Lady Wallace. Price 2s.\nboards; 2s. 6d. cloth._\n\n_Tales of Ancient Greece._\n\n_By the Rev. G.W. Cox, M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d._\n\n\n_Stories and Tales._\n\n_By Elizabeth M. Sewell._\n\n_Cabinet Edition, in Ten Volumes:\u2014_\n\n _Amy Herbert, 2s. 6d._\n _Gertrude, 2s. 6d._\n _Earl\u2019s Daughter, 2s. 6d._\n _Experience of Life, 2s. 6d._\n _Cleve Hall, 2s. 6d._\n _Ivors, 2s. 6d._\n _Katharine Ashton, 2s. 6d._\n _Margaret Percival, 3s. 6d._\n _Laneton Parsonage, 3s. 6d._\n _Ursula, 3s. 6d._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n POETRY and THE DRAMA.\n\n_Ballads and Lyrics of Old France; with other Poems._\n\n _By A. Lang, M.A._\n\n _Square fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n_The London Series of French Classics._\n\n _Edited by Ch. Cassal, LL.D. T. Karcher, LL.B. and L\u00e9once Sti\u00e8venard._\n\n _The following Plays, in the Division of the Drama in this Series, are\n now ready:\u2014_\n\nCORNEILLE\u2019S _Le Cid, 1s. 6d._\nVOLTAIRE\u2019S _Zaire, 1s. 6d._\nLAMARTINE\u2019S _Toussaint Louverture, double\nvolume, 2s. 6d._\n\n_Milton\u2019s Lycidas and Epitaphium Damonis._\n\n_Edited, with Notes and Introduction, by C.S. Jerram, M.A._\n\n_Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d._\n\n_Lays of Ancient Rome; with Ivry and the Armada._\n\n _By the Right Hon. Lord Macaulay._\n\n _16mo. 3s. 6d._\n\n_Lord Macaulay\u2019s Lays of Ancient Rome. With 90 Illustrations on Wood\n from Drawings by G. Scharf._\n\n _Fcp. 4to. 21s._\n\n_Miniature Edition of Lord Macaulay\u2019s Lays of Ancient Rome, with\n Scharf\u2019s 90 Illustrations reduced in Lithography._\n\n _Imp. 16mo. 10s. 6d._\n\n\n_Horatii Opera, Library Edition, with English Notes, Marginal References\n and various Readings._\n\n _Edited by Rev. J.E. Yonge, M.A._\n\n _8vo. 21s._\n\n_Southey\u2019s Poetical Works with the Author\u2019s last Corrections and\n Additions._\n\n _Medium 8vo. with Portrait, 14s._\n\n_Bowdler\u2019s Family Shakspeare, cheaper Genuine Edition._\n\n_Complete in 1 vol. medium 8vo. large type, with 36 Woodcut\n Illustrations, 14s. or in 6 vols. fcp. 8vo. price 21s._\n\n_Poems by Jean Ingelow._\n\n _2 vols. Fcp. 8vo. 10s._\n\nFIRST SERIES, _containing \u2018Divided,\u2019 \u2018The Star\u2019s Monument,\u2019 &c. 16th\n Thousand. Fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\nSECOND SERIES, _\u2018A Story of Doom,\u2019 \u2018Gladys and her Island,\u2019 &c. 5th\n Thousand. Fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n_Poems by Jean Ingelow. First Series, with nearly 100 Woodcut\n Illustrations._\n\n _Fcp. 4to. 21s._\n\n_The \u00c6neid of Virgil Translated into English Verse._\n\n _By J. Conington, M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 9s._\n\n\n ------------------\n\n RURAL SPORTS, HORSE and CATTLE\n MANAGEMENT, &c.\n\n_Annals of the Road, being a History of Coaching from the Earliest Times\n to the Present._\n\n _By Captain Malet. With Practical Hints on Driving and all Coaching\n matters, by Nimrod._\n\n _Reprinted from the_ SPORTING MAGAZINE _by permission of the\n Proprietors. 1 vol. medium 8vo. with Coloured Plates, uniform with\n Mr. Birch Reynardson\u2019s \u2018Down the Road.\u2019_\n\n [_On May 1._\n\n_Down the Road; or, Reminiscences of a Gentleman Coachman._\n\n _By C.T.S. Birch Reynardson._\n\n _Second Edition, with 12 Coloured Illustrations from Paintings by H.\n Alken._\n\n _Medium 8vo. price 21s._\n\n_Blaine\u2019s Encyclop\u00e6dia of Rural Sports; Complete Accounts, Historical,\n Practical, and Descriptive, of Hunting, Shooting, Fishing, Racing,\n &c._\n\n _With above 600 Woodcuts_ (_20 from Designs by_ JOHN LEECH). _8vo.\n 21s._\n\n\n_A Book on Angling: a Treatise on the Art of Angling in every branch,\n including full Illustrated Lists of Salmon Flies._\n\n _By Francis Francis._\n\n _Post 8vo. Portrait and Plates, 15s._\n\n\n_Wilcocks\u2019s Sea-Fisherman: comprising the Chief Methods of Hook and Line\n Fishing, a glance at Nets, and remarks on Boats and Boating._\n\n _New Edition, with 80 Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_The Ox, his Diseases and their Treatment; with an Essay on Parturition\n in the Cow._\n\n _By J.R. Dobson, Memb. R.C.V.S._\n\n _Crown 8vo. with Illustrations 7s. 6d._\n\n_Youatt on the Horse._\n\n _Revised and enlarged by W. Watson, M.R.C.V.S._\n\n _8vo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d._\n\n_Youatt\u2019s Work on the Dog, revised and enlarged._\n\n _8vo. Woodcuts, 6s._\n\n_Horses and Stables._\n\n _By Colonel F. Fitzwygram, XV. the King\u2019s Hussars._\n\n _With 24 Plates of Illustrations. 8vo. 1Os. 6d._\n\n_The Dog in Health and Disease._\n\n _By Stonehenge._\n\n _With 73 Wood Engravings. Square crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n_The Greyhound._\n\n _By Stonehenge._\n\n _Revised Edition, with 25 Portraits of Greyhounds, &c. Square crown\n 8vo. 15s._\n\n_Stables and Stable Fittings._\n\n _By W. Miles, Esq._\n\n _Imp. 8vo. with 13 Plates, 15s._\n\n_The Horse\u2019s Foot, and how to keep it Sound._\n\n _By W. Miles, Esq._\n\n _Ninth Edition. Imp. 8vo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d._\n\n_A Plain Treatise on Horse-shoeing._\n\n _By W. Miles, Esq._\n\n _Sixth Edition. Post 8vo. Woodcuts, 2s. 6d._\n\n_Remarks on Horses\u2019 Teeth, addressed to Purchasers._\n\n _By W. Miles, Esq._\n\n _Post 8vo. 1s. 6d._\n\n_The Fly-Fisher\u2019s Entomology._\n\n _By Alfred Ronalds._\n\n _With 20 coloured Plates. 8vo. 14s._\n\n ------------------\n\n WORKS of UTILITY and GENERAL\n INFORMATION.\n\n_Maunder\u2019s Treasury of Knowledge and Library of Reference; comprising an\n English Dictionary and Grammar, Universal Gazetteer, Classical\n Dictionary, Chronology, Law Dictionary, Synopsis of the Peerage,\n Useful Tables, &c._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Maunder\u2019s Biographical Treasury._\n\n _Latest Edition, reconstructed and partly rewritten, with about 1,000\n additional Memoirs, by W.L.R. Cates._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Maunder\u2019s Scientific and Literary Treasury; a Popular Encyclop\u00e6dia of\n Science, Literature, and Art._\n\n _New Edition, in part rewritten, with above 1,000 new articles, by\n J.Y. Johnson._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Maunder\u2019s Treasury of Geography, Physical, Historical, Descriptive, and\n Political._\n\n _Edited by W. Hughes, F.R.G.S._\n\n _With 7 Maps and 16 Plates. Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Maunder\u2019s Historical Treasury; General Introductory Outlines of\n Universal History, and a Series of Separate Histories._\n\n _Revised by the Rev. G.W. Cox, M.A._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Maunder\u2019s Treasury of Natural History; or Popular Dictionary of\n Zoology._\n\n _Revised and corrected Edition. Fcp. 8vo. with 900 Woodcuts, 6s._\n\n_The Treasury of Bible Knowledge; being a Dictionary of the Books,\n Persons, Places, Events, and other Matters of which mention is made in\n Holy Scripture._\n\n _By Rev. J. Ayre, M.A._\n\n _With Maps, 15 Plates, and numerous Woodcuts. Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_The Theory and Practice of Banking._\n\n _By H.D. Macleod, M.A._\n\n _Third Edition, revised throughout. 8vo price 12s._\n\n_The Elements of Banking._\n\n _By Henry Dunning Macleod, Esq. M.A._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d._\n\n\n_Modern Cookery for Private Families, reduced to a System of Easy\n Practice in a Series of carefully-tested Receipts._\n\n _By Eliza Acton._\n\n _With 8 Plates & 150 Woodcuts. Fcp. 8vo. 6s._\n\n_A Practical Treatise on Brewing; with Formul\u00e6 for Public Brewers, and\n Instructions for Private Families._\n\n _By W. Black._\n\n _Fifth Edition. 8vo. 10s. 6d._\n\n_English Chess Problems._\n\n _Edited by J. Pierce, M.A. and W.T. Pierce._\n\n _With 608 Diagrams. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d._\n\n_The Theory of the Modern Scientific Game of Whist._\n\n _By W. Pole, F.R.S._\n\n _Seventh Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d._\n\n_The Correct Card; or, How to Play at Whist: a Whist Catechism._\n\n _By Captain A. Campbell-Walker._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo._\n\n [_Nearly ready._\n\n_The Cabinet Lawyer; a Popular Digest of the Laws of England, Civil,\n Criminal, and Constitutional._\n\n _Twenty-fourth Edition, corrected and extended. Fcp. 8vo. 9s._\n\n_Pewtner\u2019s Comprehensive Specifier; a Guide to the Practical\n Specification of every kind of Building-Artificer\u2019s Work._\n\n _Edited by W. Young._\n\n _Crown 8vo. 6s._\n\n_Chess Openings._\n\n _By F.W. Longman, Balliol College, Oxford._\n\n _Second Edition, revised. Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d._\n\n_Hints to Mothers on the Management of their Health during the Period of\n Pregnancy and in the Lying-in Room._\n\n _By Thomas Bull, M.D._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n_The Maternal Management of Children in Health and Disease._\n\n _By Thomas Bull, M.D._\n\n _Fcp. 8vo. 5s._\n\n\n INDEX.\n\n _Acton\u2019s_ Modern Cookery, 40\n\n _Aird\u2019s_ Blackstone Economised, 39\n\n _Airy\u2019s_ Hebrew Scriptures, 29\n\n Alpine Club Map of Switzerland, 34\n\n Alpine Guide (The), 34\n\n _Amos\u2019s_ Jurisprudence, 10\n\n \u2014\u2014 Primer of the Constitution, 10\n\n _Anderson\u2019s_ Strength of Materials, 20\n\n _Armstrong\u2019s_ Organic Chemistry, 20\n\n _Arnold\u2019s_ (Dr.) Christian Life, 29\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lectures on Modern History, 2\n\n \u2014\u2014 Miscellaneous Works, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 School Sermons, 29\n\n \u2014\u2014 Sermons, 29\n\n \u2014\u2014 (T.) Manual of English Literature, 12\n\n Atherstone Priory, 36\n\n Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson, 14\n\n _Ayre\u2019s_ Treasury of Bible Knowledge, 39\n\n\n _Bacon\u2019s_ Essays, by _Whately_, 11\n\n \u2014\u2014 Life and Letters, by _Spedding_, 11\n\n \u2014\u2014 Works, 10\n\n _Bain\u2019s_ Mental and Moral Science, 12\n\n \u2014\u2014 on the Senses and Intellect, 12\n\n \u2014\u2014 Emotions and Will, 12\n\n _Baker\u2019s_ Two Works on Ceylon, 34\n\n _Ball\u2019s_ Guide to the Central Alps, 34\n\n \u2014\u2014 Guide to the Western Alps, 35\n\n \u2014\u2014 Guide to the Eastern Alps, 34\n\n _Bancroft\u2019s_ Native Races of the Pacific, 23\n\n _Barry_ on Railway Appliances, 20\n\n _Becker\u2019s_ Charicles and Gallus, 35\n\n _Black\u2019s_ Treatise on Brewing, 40\n\n _Blackley\u2019s_ German-English Dictionary, 16\n\n _Blaine\u2019s_ Rural Sports, 37\n\n _Bloxam\u2019s_ Metals, 20\n\n _Boultbee_ on 39 Articles, 29\n\n _Bourne\u2019s_ Catechism of the Steam Engine, 27\n\n \u2014\u2014 Handbook of Steam Engine, 27\n\n \u2014\u2014 Treatise on the Steam Engine, 27\n\n \u2014\u2014 Improvements in the same, 27\n\n _Bowdler\u2019s_ Family _Shakspeare_, 37\n\n _Bramley-Moore\u2019s_ Six Sisters of the Valley, 36\n\n _Brande\u2019s_ Dictionary of Science, Literature, and Art, 23\n\n _Brinkley\u2019s_ Astronomy, 12\n\n _Browne\u2019s_ Exposition of the 39 Articles, 29\n\n _Buckle\u2019s_ History of Civilisation, 3\n\n \u2014\u2014 Posthumous Remains, 12\n\n _Buckton\u2019s_ Health in the House, 24\n\n _Bull\u2019s_ Hints to Mothers, 40\n\n \u2014\u2014 Maternal Management of Children, 40\n\n Burgomaster\u2019s Family (The), 34\n\n _Burke\u2019s_ Rise of Great Families, 8\n\n \u2014\u2014 Vicissitudes of Families, 8\n\n _Busk\u2019s_ Folk-lore of Rome, 35\n\n \u2014\u2014 Valleys of Tirol, 33\n\n\n Cabinet Lawyer, 40\n\n _Campbell\u2019s_ Norway, 35\n\n _Cates\u2019s_ Biographical Dictionary, 8\n\n \u2014\u2014 and _Woodward\u2019s_ Encyclop\u00e6dia, 5\n\n Changed Aspects of Unchanged Truths, 14\n\n _Chesney\u2019s_ Indian Polity, 3\n\n \u2014\u2014 Modern Military Biography, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 Waterloo Campaign, 3\n\n _Codrington\u2019s_ Life and Letters, 7\n\n _Colenso_ on Moabite Stone &c., 32\n\n \u2014\u2014_\u2019s_ Pentateuch and Book of Joshua, 32\n\n _Collier\u2019s_ Demosthenes on the Crown, 13\n\n Commonplace Philosopher in Town and Country, by A. K. H. B., 14\n\n _Comte\u2019s_ Positive Polity, 8\n\n _Congreve\u2019s_ Essays, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 Politics of Aristotle, 11\n\n _Conington\u2019s_ Translation of Virgil\u2019s \u00c6neid, 37\n\n \u2014\u2014 Miscellaneous Writings, 13\n\n _Contanseau\u2019s_ Two French Dictionaries, 15\n\n _Conybeare_ and _Howson\u2019s_ Life and Epistles of St. Paul, 30\n\n _Corneille\u2019s_ Le Cid, 36\n\n Counsel and Comfort from a City Pulpit, 14\n\n _Cox\u2019s_ (G.W.) Aryan Mythology, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 Crusades, 6\n\n \u2014\u2014 History of Greece, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 General History of Greece, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 School ditto, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 Tale of the Great Persian War, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 Tales of Ancient Greece, 36\n\n _Crawley\u2019s_ Thucydides, 4\n\n _Creighton\u2019s_ Age of Elizabeth, 6\n\n _Cresy\u2019s_ Encyclop\u00e6dia of Civil Engineering, 27\n\n Critical Essays of a Country Parson, 14\n\n _Crookes\u2019s_ Chemical Analysis, 25\n\n \u2014\u2014 Dyeing and Calico-printing, 28\n\n _Culley\u2019s_ Handbook of Telegraphy, 27\n\n\n _Davidson\u2019s_ Introduction to the New Testament, 31\n\n _D\u2019Aubign\u00e8\u2019s_ Reformation, 31\n\n _De Caisne_ and _Le Maout\u2019s_ Botany, 24\n\n _De Morgan\u2019s_ Paradoxes, 13\n\n _De Tocqueville\u2019s_ Democracy in America, 9\n\n _Disraeli\u2019s_ Lord George Bentinck, 8\n\n _Disraeli\u2019s_ Novels and Tales, 35\n\n _Dobson_ on the Ox, 38\n\n _Dove\u2019s_ Law of Storms, 18\n\n _Doyle\u2019s_ (R.) Fairyland, 25\n\n\n _Eastlake\u2019s_ Hints on Household Taste, 26\n\n _Edwards\u2019s_ Rambles among the Dolomites, 34\n\n \u2014\u2014 Nile, 32\n\n Elements of Botany, 23\n\n _Ellicott\u2019s_ Commentary on Ephesians, 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 Galatians, 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 Pastoral Epist., 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 Philippians, &c., 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 Thessalonians, 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lectures on Life of Christ, 29\n\n Elsa: a Tale of the Tyrolean Alps, 36\n\n _Evans\u2019_ (J.) Ancient Stone Implements, 23\n\n \u2014\u2014 (A.J.) Bosnia, 33\n\n _Ewald\u2019s_ History of Israel, 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 Antiquities of Israel, 31\n\n\n _Fairbairn\u2019s_ Application of Cast and Wrought Iron to Building, 27\n\n \u2014\u2014 Information for Engineers, 27\n\n \u2014\u2014 Life, 7\n\n \u2014\u2014 Treatise on Mills and Millwork, 27\n\n _Farrar\u2019s_ Chapters on Language, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 Families of Speech, 13\n\n _Fitzwygram_ on Horses and Stables, 38\n\n _Forbes\u2019s_ Two Years in Fiji, 33\n\n _Francis\u2019s_ Fishing Book, 37\n\n _Freeman\u2019s_ Historical Geography of Europe, 6\n\n _Freshfield\u2019s_ Italian Alps, 33\n\n _Froude\u2019s_ English in Ireland, 2\n\n \u2014\u2014 History of England, 2\n\n \u2014\u2014 Short Studies, 12\n\n\n _Gairdner\u2019s_ Houses of Lancaster and York, 6\n\n _Ganot\u2019s_ Elementary Physics, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Natural Philosophy, 19\n\n _Gardiner\u2019s_ Buckingham and Charles, 3\n\n \u2014\u2014 Thirty Years\u2019 War, 6\n\n _Geffcken\u2019s_ Church and State, 10\n\n German Home Life, 13\n\n _Gibson\u2019s_ Religion and Science, 29\n\n _Gilbert & Churchill\u2019s_ Dolomites, 34\n\n _Girdlestone\u2019s_ Bible Synonyms, 29\n\n _Goodeve\u2019s_ Mechanics, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Mechanism, 20\n\n _Grant\u2019s_ Ethics of Aristotle, 11\n\n Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson, 14\n\n _Greville\u2019s_ Journal, 2\n\n _Griffin\u2019s_ Algebra and Trigonometry, 20\n\n _Grohman\u2019s_ Tyrol and the Tyrolese, 32\n\n _Grove_ (Sir W.R.) on Correlation of Physical Forces, 19\n\n \u2014\u2014 (F.C.) The Frosty Caucasus, 32\n\n _Gwilt\u2019s_ Encyclop\u00e6dia of Architecture, 26\n\n\n _Harrison\u2019s_ Order and Progress, 9\n\n _Hartley_ on the Air, 19\n\n _Hartwig\u2019s_ Aerial World, 22\n\n \u2014\u2014 Polar World, 22\n\n \u2014\u2014 Sea and its Living Wonders, 22\n\n \u2014\u2014 Subterranean World, 22\n\n \u2014\u2014 Tropical World, 22\n\n _Haughton\u2019s_ Animal Mechanics, 20\n\n _Hayward\u2019s_ Biographical and Critical Essays, 7\n\n _Heathcote\u2019s_ Fen and Mere, 28\n\n _Heine\u2019s_ Life and Works, by Stigand, 7\n\n _Helmholtz_ on Tone, 23\n\n _Helmholtz\u2019s_ Scientific Lectures, 19\n\n _Helmsley\u2019s_ Trees, Shrubs, and Herbaceous Plants, 24\n\n _Herschel\u2019s_ Outlines of Astronomy, 18\n\n _Hinchliff\u2019s_ Over the Sea and Far Away, 33\n\n _Holland\u2019s_ Fragmentary Papers, 21\n\n _Holms_ on the Army, 4\n\n _Hullah\u2019s_ History of Modern Music, 23\n\n \u2014\u2014 Transition Period, 23\n\n _Hume\u2019s_ Essays, 12\n\n \u2014\u2014 Treatise on Human Nature, 12\n\n\n _Ihne\u2019s_ History of Rome, 5\n\n Indian Alps, 32\n\n _Ingelow\u2019s_ Poems, 37\n\n\n _Jameson\u2019s_ Legends of Saints and Martyrs, 26\n\n \u2014\u2014 Legends of the Madonna, 26\n\n \u2014\u2014 Legends of the Monastic Orders, 26\n\n \u2014\u2014 Legends of the Saviour, 26\n\n _Jelf_ on Confession, 30\n\n _Jenkin\u2019s_ Electricity and Magnetism, 20\n\n _Jerram\u2019s_ Lycidas of Milton, 35\n\n _Jerrold\u2019s_ Life of Napoleon, 2\n\n _Johnston\u2019s_ Geographical Dictionary, 17\n\n _Jukes\u2019s_ Types of Genesis, 31\n\n \u2014\u2014 on Second Death, 31\n\n\n _Kalisch\u2019s_ Commentary on the Bible, 30\n\n _Keith\u2019s_ Evidence of Prophecy, 30\n\n _Kerl\u2019s_ Metallurgy, by _Crookes_ and _R\u00f6hrig_, 27\n\n _Kingsley\u2019s_ American Lectures, 13\n\n _Kirby_ and _Spence\u2019s_ Entomology, 21\n\n _Kirkman\u2019s_ Philosophy, 11\n\n _Knatchbull-Hugessen\u2019s_ Whispers from Fairy-Land, 35\n\n \u2014\u2014 Higgledy-Piggledy, 35\n\n\n _Lamartine\u2019s_ Toussaint Louverture, 36\n\n Landscapes, Churches, &c. by A. K. H. B., 14\n\n _Lang\u2019s_ Ballads and Lyrics, 36\n\n _Latham\u2019s_ English Dictionary, 15\n\n \u2014\u2014 Handbook of the English Language, 15\n\n _Laughton\u2019s_ Nautical Surveying, 19\n\n _Lawrence_ on Rocks, 22\n\n _Lecky\u2019s_ History of European Morals, 5\n\n \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 Rationalism, 5\n\n \u2014\u2014 Leaders of Public Opinion, 8\n\n _Lee\u2019s_ Kesslerloch, 22\n\n _Lefroy\u2019s_ Bermudas, 33\n\n Leisure Hours in Town, by A. K. H. B., 14\n\n Lessons of Middle Age, by A. K. H. B., 14\n\n _Lewes\u2019s_ Biographical History of Philosophy, 6\n\n _Lewis_ on Authority, 12\n\n _Liddell_ and _Scott\u2019s_ Greek-English Lexicons, 16\n\n _Lindley_ and _Moore\u2019s_ Treasury of Botany, 23\n\n _Lloyd\u2019s_ Magnetism, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Wave-Theory of Light, 21\n\n _Longman\u2019s_ (F.W.) Chess Openings, 40\n\n \u2014\u2014 German Dictionary, 15\n\n \u2014\u2014 (W.) Edward the Third, 2\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lectures on History of England, 2\n\n \u2014\u2014 Old and New St. Paul\u2019s, 26\n\n _London\u2019s_ Encyclop\u00e6dia of Agriculture, 28\n\n \u2014\u2014 Gardening, 28\n\n \u2014\u2014 Plants, 24\n\n _Lubbock\u2019s_ Origin of Civilisation, 22\n\n Lyra Germanica, 32\n\n\n _Macaulay\u2019s_ (Lord) Essays, 1\n\n \u2014\u2014 History of England, 1\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lays of Ancient Rome, 25, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Life and Letters, 7\n\n \u2014\u2014 Miscellaneous Writings, 12\n\n \u2014\u2014 Speeches, 12\n\n \u2014\u2014 Works, 2\n\n _McCulloch\u2019s_ Dictionary of Commerce, 16\n\n _Macleod\u2019s_ Principles of Economical Philosophy, 10\n\n \u2014\u2014 Theory and Practice of Banking, 39\n\n \u2014\u2014 Elements of Banking, 39\n\n Mademoiselle Mori,, 36\n\n _Malet\u2019s_ Annals of the Road, 37\n\n _Malleson\u2019s_ Genoese Studies, 3\n\n \u2014\u2014 Native States of India, 3\n\n _Marshall\u2019s_ Physiology, 25\n\n _Marshman\u2019s_ History of India, 3\n\n \u2014\u2014 Life of Havelock, 8\n\n _Martineau\u2019s_ Christian Life, 32\n\n \u2014\u2014 Hymns, 31\n\n _Maunder\u2019s_ Biographical Treasury, 39\n\n \u2014\u2014 Geographical Treasury, 39\n\n \u2014\u2014 Historical Treasury, 39\n\n \u2014\u2014 Scientific and Literary Treasury, 39\n\n \u2014\u2014 Treasury of Knowledge, 39\n\n \u2014\u2014 Treasury of Natural History, 39\n\n _Maxwell\u2019s_ Theory of Heat, 20\n\n _May\u2019s_ History of Democracy, 2\n\n \u2014\u2014 History of England, 2\n\n _Melville\u2019s_ Digby Grand, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 General Bounce, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Gladiators, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Good for Nothing, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Holmby House, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Interpreter, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Kate Coventry, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Queens Maries, 36\n\n _Menzies\u2019_ Forest Trees and Woodland Scenery, 24\n\n _Merivale\u2019s_ Fall of the Roman Republic, 5\n\n \u2014\u2014 General History of Rome, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 Romans under the Empire, 4\n\n _Merrifield\u2019s_ Arithmetic and Mensuration, 20\n\n Miles on Horse\u2019s Foot and Horse Shoeing, 38\n\n \u2014\u2014 on Horse\u2019s Teeth and Stables, 38\n\n _Mill_ (J.) on the Mind, 10\n\n \u2014\u2014 (J.S.) on Liberty, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 on Representative Government, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 Utilitarianism, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 Autobiography, 7\n\n _Mill\u2019s_ Dissertations and Discussions, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 Essays on Religion &c., 29\n\n \u2014\u2014 Hamilton\u2019s Philosophy, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 System of Logic, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 Political Economy, 9\n\n \u2014\u2014 Unsettled Questions, 9\n\n _Miller\u2019s_ Elements of Chemistry, 24\n\n \u2014\u2014 Inorganic Chemistry, 20\n\n _Minto\u2019s_ (Lord) Life and Letters, 7\n\n _Mitchell\u2019s_ Manual of Assaying, 28\n\n Modern Novelist\u2019s Library, 36\n\n _Monsell\u2019s_ \u2018Spiritual Songs\u2019, 32\n\n _Moore\u2019s_ Irish Melodies, illustrated, 26\n\n _Morant\u2019s_ Game Preservers, 22\n\n _Morell\u2019s_ Elements of Psychology, 11\n\n \u2014\u2014 Mental Philosophy, 11\n\n _M\u00fcller\u2019s_ Chips from a German Workshop, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 Science of Language, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 Science of Religion, 5\n\n\n _Nelson_ on the Moon, 18\n\n New Reformation, by _Theodorus_, 4\n\n New Testament, Illustrated Edition, 25\n\n _Northcott\u2019s_ Lathes and Turning, 26\n\n\n _O'Conor\u2019s_ Commentary on Hebrews, 31\n\n \u2014\u2014 Romans, 31\n\n \u2014\u2014 St. John, 31\n\n _Owen\u2019s_ Comparative Anatomy and Physiology of Vertebrate Animals, 21\n\n\n _Packe\u2019s_ Guide to the Pyrenees, 35\n\n _Paget\u2019s_ Naval Powers, 28\n\n _Pattison\u2019s_ Casaubon, 7\n\n _Payen\u2019s_ Industrial Chemistry, 26\n\n _Pewtner\u2019s_ Comprehensive Specifier, 40\n\n _Pierce\u2019s_ Chess Problems, 40\n\n _Plunket\u2019s_ Travels in the Alps, 33\n\n _Pole\u2019s_ Game of Whist, 40\n\n _Preece & Sivewright\u2019s_ Telegraphy, 20\n\n _Prendergast\u2019s_ Mastery of Languages, 16\n\n Present-Day Thoughts, by A. K. H. B., 14\n\n _Proctor\u2019s_ Astronomical Essays, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Moon, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Orbs around Us, 18\n\n \u2014\u2014 Other Worlds than Ours, 18\n\n \u2014\u2014 Saturn, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Scientific Essays (New Series), 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Sun, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Transits of Venus, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Two Star Atlases, 18\n\n \u2014\u2014 Universe, 17\n\n Public Schools Atlas of Ancient Geography, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Atlas of Modern Geography, 17\n\n \u2014\u2014 Manual of Modern Geography, 17\n\n\n _Rawlinson\u2019s_ Parthia, 5\n\n \u2014\u2014 Sassanians, 5\n\n Recreations of a Country Parson, 14\n\n _Redgrave\u2019s_ Dictionary of Artists, 25\n\n _Reilly\u2019s_ Map of Mont Blanc, 34\n\n \u2014\u2014 Monte Rosa, 34\n\n _Reresby\u2019s_ Memoirs, 8\n\n _Reynardson\u2019s_ Down the Road, 37\n\n _Rich\u2019s_ Dictionary of Antiquities, 15\n\n _River\u2019s_ Rose Amateur\u2019s Guide, 23\n\n _Rogers\u2019s_ Eclipse of Faith, 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 Defence of Eclipse of Faith, 30\n\n \u2014\u2014 Essays, 9\n\n _Roget\u2019s_ Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases, 15\n\n _Ronald\u2019s_ Fly-Fisher\u2019s Entomology, 38\n\n _Roscoe\u2019s_ Outlines of Civil Procedure, 10\n\n _Rothschild\u2019s_ Israelites, 30\n\n _Russell\u2019s_ Recollections and Suggestions, 2\n\n\n _Sandars\u2019s_ Justinian\u2019s Institutes, 10\n\n _Savile_ on Apparitions, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 on Primitive Faith, 30\n\n _Schellen\u2019s_ Spectrum Analysis, 19\n\n _Scott\u2019s_ Lectures on the Fine Arts, 25\n\n \u2014\u2014 Poems, 25\n\n \u2014\u2014 Papers on Civil Engineering, 28\n\n Seaside Musing, by A. K. H. B., 14\n\n _Seebohm\u2019s_ Oxford Reformers of 1498, 4\n\n \u2014\u2014 Protestant Revolution, 6\n\n _Sewell\u2019s_ Questions of the Day, 31\n\n \u2014\u2014 Preparation for Communion, 31\n\n \u2014\u2014 Stories and Tales, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Thoughts for the Age, 31\n\n \u2014\u2014 History of France, 3\n\n _Shelley\u2019s_ Workshop Appliances, 20\n\n _Short\u2019s_ Church History, 6\n\n _Simpson\u2019s_ Meeting the Sun, 34\n\n _Smith\u2019s_ (_Sydney_) Essays, 12\n\n \u2014\u2014 Wit and Wisdom, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 (Dr. R.A.) Air and Rain, 19\n\n _Southey\u2019s_ Doctor, 13\n\n \u2014\u2014 Poetical Works, 37\n\n _Stanley\u2019s_ History of British Birds, 22\n\n _Stephen\u2019s_ Ecclesiastical Biography, 8\n\n _Stockmar\u2019s_ Memoirs, 7\n\n _Stonehenge_ on the Dog, 38\n\n \u2014\u2014 on the Greyhound, 38\n\n _Stoney_ on Strains, 28\n\n Sunday Afternoons at the Parish Church of a University City, by A. K.\n H. B., 14\n\n Supernatural Religion, 32\n\n _Swinbourne\u2019s_ Picture Logic, 11\n\n\n _Taylor\u2019s_ History of India, 3\n\n \u2014\u2014 Manual of Ancient History, 6\n\n \u2014\u2014 Manual of Modern History, 6\n\n \u2014\u2014 (_Jeremy_) Works, edited by _Eden_, 31\n\n Text-Books of Science, 20\n\n _Thomson\u2019s_ Laws of Thought, 11\n\n _Thorpe\u2019s_ Quantitative Analysis, 20\n\n _Thorpe_ and _Muir\u2019s_ Qualitative Analysis, 20\n\n _Todd_ (A.) on Parliamentary Government, 2\n\n _Trench\u2019s_ Realities of Irish Life, 13\n\n _Trollope\u2019s_ Barchester Towers, 36\n\n \u2014\u2014 Warden, 36\n\n _Twiss\u2019s_ Law of Nations, 10\n\n _Tyndall\u2019s_ American Lectures on Light, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Diamagnetism, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Fragments of Science, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lectures on Electricity, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lectures on Light, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Lectures on Sound, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Heat a Mode of Motion, 20\n\n \u2014\u2014 Molecular Physics, 20\n\n\n _Ueberweg\u2019s_ System of Logic, 11\n\n _Ure\u2019s_ Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, and Mines, 27\n\n\n _Voltaire\u2019s_ Zaire, 36\n\n _Walker_ on Whist, 40\n\n _Warburton\u2019s_ Edward the Third, 6\n\n _Watson\u2019s_ Geometry, 20\n\n _Watts\u2019s_ Dictionary of Chemistry, 25\n\n _Webb\u2019s_ Objects for Common Telescopes, 18\n\n _Weinhold\u2019s_ Experimental Physics, 19\n\n _Wellington\u2019s_ Life, by _Gleig_, 8\n\n _Whately\u2019s_ English Synonymes, 15\n\n \u2014\u2014 Logic, 11\n\n \u2014\u2014 Rhetoric, 11\n\n _White_ and _Riddle\u2019s_ Latin Dictionaries, 16\n\n _Wilcocks\u2019s_ Sea-Fisherman, 38\n\n _Williams\u2019s_ Aristotle\u2019s Ethics, 11\n\n _Wood\u2019s_ (T.G.) Bible Animals, 22\n\n \u2014\u2014 Homes without Hands, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Insects at Home, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Insects Abroad, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 Out of Doors, 22\n\n \u2014\u2014 Strange Dwellings, 21\n\n \u2014\u2014 (J.T.) Ephesus, 33\n\n _Wyatt\u2019s_ History of Prussia, 3\n\n\n _Yonge\u2019s_ English-Greek Lexicons, 16\n\n \u2014\u2014 Horace, 37\n\n _Youatt_ on the Dog, 38\n\n \u2014\u2014 on the Horse, 38\n\n\n _Zeller\u2019s_ Plato, 6\n\n \u2014\u2014 Socrates, 5\n\n \u2014\u2014 Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics, 5\n\n _Zimmern\u2019s_ Life of Schopenhauer, 7\n\n LONDON: PRINTED BY\n\n SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE\n\n AND PARLIAMENT STREET\n\n Transcriber\u2019s Note:\n\n Minor errors and inconsistencies of punctuation have been corrected\n with no further mention here. Obvious printer\u2019s errors have also\n been corrected, as noted in the table below.\n\n On p. 23, the reference to Chapter VI. \u00a78 seems to be in error, and\n should have been to \u00a78 of Chapter V., where there is a reference to\n Elijah as an historical figure. This has been corrected.\n\n The reference to Isaiah 63.17, as printed on p. xxx, was\n hand-corrected to refer to 63.16, which itself is quoted on p. 229.\n The correction is made here as well.\n\n Footnote 308 on p. 109 had no corresponding anchor in the text. The\n intended placement is not obvious. The anchor has been added at the\n end of the first paragraph.\n\n The reference to Psalms XXIII on p. 133 was printed as \u2018XVIII\u2019, and\n has been corrected.\n\n On p. 171, the opening quote of the passage beginning:\n\n \u2018Helios saw the maiden Anaxibia dancing there...\n\n has no closing quote, and the end of the passage is not clear.\n\n Likewise, on p. 171, with the passage beginning:\n\n \u2018To me is due from thee...\n\n In the Excursus section, there is no Excursus J.\n\n p. xvi n. 3 Vienna 1868, p. 208.[)] Added.\n\n p. xxx (Is. LXIII. 1[7/6]) Corrected.\n\n p. 17 it will [be] the business Added.\n\n p. 23 (See Chap. V[I]. \u00a78) Removed.\n\n p. 25 a[ ]priori Added.\n\n p. 35 n. 104 \u2018civilisation-historical[\u2019] Added.\n\n p. 59 undoubted[l]y Added.\n\n p. 83 against the townsmen.[\u2019] Removed.\n\n p. 86 [\u2018]this volatile people Added.\n\n p. 88 of an inferior cast[e] Added.\n\n p. 99 her grey-headed spouse.[\u2019] Added.\n\n p. 115 n. 322 and shine on the creatures.[\u2019] Added.\n\n p. 133 The psalmist of Ps. X[V/X]III. Corrected.\n\n p. 156 _Bede[n/u]tung_ Corrected.\n\n p. 169 proved [s/t]o be Corrected.\n\n p. 194 is ma[k/d]e by the poet Corrected.\n\n p. 199 And [their/there] arose strife Corrected.\n\n p. 224 the Akra people o[r/f] the Corrected.\n Gold Coast\n\n p. 329 and Persians became the Added.\n dominant powers.[\u2019]\n\n p. 233 in the land now called Corrected.\n Judea,[\u2019]\n\n p. 239 n. 633 P[l/h]antasie Corrected.\n\n p. 292 n. 690 insertion of [ ] can be Missing\n explained word/character.\n\n p. 301 vividly recal[l] the speeches Added.\n\n p. 356 n. 775 see my arti[t/c]le Corrected.\n\n p. 454 di[f/s]covery of Mythology Corrected.","title":"Mythology among the Hebrews and Its Historical Development","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":183830}