Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 9, 1898.djvu/91

 Reviews. 67

Modern Mythology. By Andrew Lang, M.A., LL.D. Longman, Green, & Co., 1897.

The literature of controversy is often amusing, but, as Mr. Lang himself remarks, it seldom serves any useful purpose. It is, how- ever, obviously convenient to have the principles of the two rival schools of Folklore interpretation — the Philological and the Anthro- pological — clearly stated.

In the business of controversy Mr. Lang is much more skilful than his opponent. Professor Max Miiller. The latter, as we complained in a notice of his " Contributions to the Science of Mythology " {Folklore, vol. viii. p. 152), seldom takes the trouble to make his position and that of his adversaries distinct ; he usually gives no references, and his assault is more in the nature of an irregular skirmish than an orderly, well-considered attack on the position. This error Mr. Lang has carefully avoided. His reply gains additional force from its preciseness ; he quotes chapter and verse for the arguments of his opponent ; he makes his own views perfectly clear, and his touch is lighter; and though he deals with the subject in a tone of easy banter, he never forgets the courtesy due to an opponent so distinguished as the Pro- fessor. At the same time, we are inclined to think that if the book had been shorter the attack would have been more effective. For instance, his third chapter, " The Question of Allies," only very indirectly affects the main issue. From the point of view of literary history it may be interesting to the folklore student of the future to know which side in the controversy was taken by Pro- fessor Tiele or Mannhardt. But here it is mere surplusage. Consistency is a very doubtful virtue; and the interpreter of myth, like other men of wisdom, need not be ashamed to admit that his views change as his knowledge widens. The same may be said even more strongly as to the inclusion of two essays on " The Firewalk " and the " Origin of Death," which, interesting enough in themselves, have no concern with the matter in hand.

Meanwhile there is nothing very novel in the method in which Mr. Lang conducts this his latest attack on the Philological school. In discussing the tale of Daphne, for instance, he makes short work of the Dahana explanation, but this is merely slaying the slain. Incidentally he shows that his opponent has much to

F 2