Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 14.djvu/248

* MYTHOLOGY. 210 MYTHOLOGY. sunie<l that the so-called "savage nijihs' treated of the same subjects as do the "higher myths,' ouly ill a less cultivated maimer ; but this is an error. Hero-myths are sometimes called legends, to distinguish them from cosmogonic mytlis. C'LASsiKiCATioN OF JIvTUs. The first important fact in mythology is that, houever mucli we use the word mythologj" as if it were especially con- cerned with gods, the earliest mythology ignores the gods altogether. Now, if we examine the body of myths found among the most primitive people, we shall find that they are without ex- ception concerned with the same subjects, and we may therefore draw the historical conclusion that mythology begins with the discussion of these subjects, whereas tales of gods and na- ture-myths are a later development. The two linked subjects thiis forming the base of all mythology are the deeds of ancestors and cos- mogonic explanation. It is customary to divide myths into historical and scientific, that is, nn-ths of the past of man and myths to explain natural phenomena. But among the most primi- tive peo]iles the two sorts of myths become one. A vague tradition of the wanderings of a triljc is simply united with an explanatiiin of a i)hysi- cal process, and thus the scientific myth is also historical. But there is one valid distinction to be kept in mind: that is. the distinction between such a .scientific myth and a religious myth. Mythology has to do with religion only because religion is one of the many fields in which the art of telling stories has exercised itself. It does not follow, however, that a story in regard to the flood or to the way the world was made has any religious significance. The former example is a very good illustration of how the historical myth may become a religious myth. Thus in India the story of the deluge was told at first withoit any suggestion that the flood was a pun- ishment of sin ; later, however, it is interpreted as a 'washing out' of sin. Another important principle in the classifica- tion of myths is the relativity of imagination in the myth-makers. This disposes of the rather crude demarcation into "savage' and "higher' nij'ths. Thus the Polynesian and Jlelanesian mythology is almost as rich in stories of the gods ns is that of Homer, but for all that the island- blacks are as savage as those of .frica, and their 'higher' mythology merely means that these savages are more imaginative than are the Mishmis and Kacharis of India, who have an active fear of devils, and a very vague idea of any other spiritual power except the ancestral ghost. An excellent illustration of mythology'- in its lowest stages is otTercd by the Central Australians, Here the whole burden of myths is concerned with the great deeds of the ances- tors in the holy Alclierinfia or "time of old.' Of real gods there is only a Creator, whose cos- mogonic work is briefly described as 'cutting out the world.' The Creator made the world and the half-human ancestors of the tribes, but the niythoIogA" is concerned only with the latter. Gods, and especially tales of gods, come much later. If we may condiule that ancestor-deeds. nnd n somewhat adventitious and remote scien- tific explanation of the universe as formed by a superior being or a,s consisting of such a being's dismembered parts (another popular, savage myth), constitute the basis of mythology, we shall no less truly find that the doings of the demons constitute the ne.xt stage. This phase of niythologj" is u.sually not developed beyond simple concrete performances. There is very little mysticism, and no system. A certain devil has had a dilliculty with some mend)er of the tribe and is cither driven oil' or slays the man, who then becomes a devil in turn. A fur- ther stage is reached as the devil becomes more godlike, i.e. is no longer a mere mischief-maker, but a helper of man. This stage may be reached by savages, and it is characteristic of Polynesian mythology that, while mainly concerned with the doings of demons, it rises also to the conception of a kind-hearted demon, although this happens seldom. At the stage when demons and not gods are the controlling spiritual agency, we find animal- myths in their crudest form, often, as in totemic tribes, being identical with ancestor-myths, but, again, without such id<'ntification. Thus, when the tribe is descended from an animal ancestor, or the ancestor has become an animal, the two sorts of myths merge; but myths about animals may be current without any notion of relation- ship between man and animal. The same is true in regiyil to myths about animated trees and mountains, etc. It is quite impossible to draw a .sharp line between this stage and that where demons and animals and cult-heroes are ele- vated to the position of gods, and tales about them become part of theology. In general we must distinguish between an- cestor and cosmogonic myths, the myths of devils and of sprites, and the myths that collect about higher anthropopathic divinities. Again, not exactly cosmogonic. but historical, are the myths of floods and wanderings and of early settlements reflected in tales of hyperborean paradises. As the cosmogonic myths are early attempts to give not a religious, but a .scientific or at least a logi- cal explanation of the universe, so this class of myths may be called historical, and they, may really reflect some pre-historical movement of races, tlnnigh most of them are enwrapped in later fable. Thus myths of a deluge may in some cases rest on an actual flood, which as far as the tribe was concerned swept away the world. We cannot suppose, however, that any of these myths have come down to us in a pure condition. They are all accretions built up by successive generations. For this reason the higher mythology contains also the lower, though generally the more savage features in the latter have been softened down. Further, in the fre- quent amalgamation of tribes into a larger po- litical unit myths often lose their original sig- nificance and arc attached to quite difVcrent gods. Even without visible outward change the hero- god lx>comes modified in spirit, according to the changing theologj". Again, as tribes merge and distribute their myths, so myths by their own charm travel from land to land, the characters being changeig- gest that he was a man. and we thus arrive at the Euhemeristic explanation of aU myths as tales told about human lieings afterwards ele- vated to divine rank. Thus, in India the 'mortal