The symbolical character gives it a peculiar representability, and attracted elder art, which was still able to represent but little by expression and characteristic portraiture. Hence, a Gorgoneion, as a work of the Cyclopes at Argos; the Gorgonea, as impressions on very old Attic, even Etruscan, coins; scenes from the combat of Perseus on the coffer of Cypselus,' and among the brazen reliefs of Gitiadas; Perseus cutting off the Chimera's head, and Chrysaor springing forth, in a very ancient terracotta; and the rising up of Pegasus, in a relief of a very early style, found at Selinus.5 CHAPTER XV. Comparison of the Theories of Others with that which has been here unfolded. READERS who have duly weighed the foregoing sections, may now, it seems to me, find themselves in a twofold situation. To many the theory and mode of treatment which have been presented, will, I hope, have appeared correct; and the conviction arisen in their minds, that from a simple consideration of the materials supplied by history, in the first place, obser 1 Paus., ii. 20. 5. 2 Ib., v. 18. 1. * Millingen, Monum. ined. N. 5, 2. 3 Ib., iii. 17. 3. 5 Treatise by Pisani. Compare with reference to the whole of this treatment of the fable, besides the brief notice in the Dorians, vol. i. p. 412, the profound and ingenious views of Völcker in his Mythology of the Japetidæ, p. 200 sqq. vations which possess general evidence, and then positions of more weighty import, but still at the same time in close connexion with the former, have been here unfolded. Others, on the contrary, who have come to the perusal entertaining views considerably at variance with those here presented, have perhaps nowhere found themselves under the necessity of abandoning them,-which must be the case with all those who are no longer conscious to themselves of the ground of their opinions; but many, perhaps, see through weaknesses and defects in my method of treatment which have still escaped myself. Both classes of readers may require that I should now also lay before them the views of other inquirers, and point out wherein they differ from mine: the former, in order that they may see whether each theory has not perhaps equal claims to probability; the latter, in order that I may in some measure justify myself to them for presenting at all, in addition to these theories, a new one of my own. But I must always confine myself to indications merely of what is most characteristic in each theory, instead of indulging in minute exposition or exhaustive criticism: the latter, indeed, would be presumptuous; and this attempt at a comparison, as conceived in my mind, is certainly not so. As I mean particularly to exhibit the opinions and principles which prevail at the present time, and that, too, in Germany, I shall begin with Heyne, who has at all events given a new impetus to the study, and perhaps also laboured most to advance it; but it is not my object to make a general and comprehensive survey: and no one must lay particular stress on the circumstance, that only six scholars are adduced, whose ideas of the science presented themselves to me more distinctly and definitely than any others. In conformity with the above explanation, I pass by the Euhemerism of Larcher, Clavier, Raoul-Rochette and Petit-Radel; perhaps I ought not to do so, if Böttiger1 had already laid down his views in connexion, with their proofs methodically arranged. Heyne. (1) The foundation of a mythus is either the report of an event, or a notion of earlier humanity;2 (2) accordingly, mythi may be divided into historical and philosophical. (3) But the origin of the mythus cannot be conceived, unless we assume that this mode of representation was necessary to a certain very remote period-that it could not on many subjects express itself otherwise than mythically. (4) The mythus, therefore, was the infant language of the race. Poverty and necessity are its parents. (5) Proper expressions, precisely corresponding to the idea, were still wanting to that age. The mind, struggling through and bursting forth, felt itself, as it were, straitened and confined.3 Accustomed to occupy itself merely with sensible impressions, it sought about for external images; and thus were ideas, particularly of a religious kind, transformed into symbols and narrations of external events. The sermo symbolicus et mythicus arose. For to cause, they then said to beget, and expressed a host of other relations by the same figure, and in this way came the concubitus deorum into mythology; and here it is easy 1 Amalthea, i. p. 12. 4 and elsewhere. 4 Commentat., ii. p. 136. to observe, that the myth-inventing age did not yet possess the morality and delicacy of a later period. But the expression became gradually confounded with the thing; the error crept in, that these narrations contained actual occurrences, and was fostered by the priests in order to excite greater interest.2 (6) Only those narrations of the most ancient times, which arose from incapacity, can be, strictly speaking, accounted mythi. In interpreting them, we must transport ourselves back into the manner of thought and expression which belonged to that remote period, and not go to work with too much subtlety and ingenuity. The interpretation must content itself with undefined resemblances, inasmuch as the mythus frequently unites even things the most different, by an accidental combination of ideas, by an ingenious play of wit. (7) The oldest are the physical, and then the theogonic mythi; from these were gradually unfolded the worships of the gods, religions.3 (8) Every allegorical personage is called Deos. (9) The poets, who did nothing more for a long time than relate, embellish, and alter mythi, afterwards made use of them as materials on which they might practise their art, and by which they might attain their end-the gratification of their hearers; as pleasing fancies, (phantasmata;) (10) they first added to them grace and elegance. The sermo mythicus now becomes poeticus: for the poet does not now employ those forms by compulsion, but with discrimination and perception of beauty. Thus Homer even, in order to adorn his poems, took from older 1 Exc. ad ll., xxiii. p. 565. 3 Commtt., xiv. p. 148. 2 Comp. Exc. i. ad Il., viii. S cosmogonies and theogonies, fables which were devised in order to convey physical doctrines in a sensible manner, and related them as actual histories.1 (11) To him they were nothing more than splendid and imposing pictures. Hesiod was contented to unite existing and heterogeneous fables into one poem, to arrange these in the best way he could, and to render them attractive by poetical ornament.2 (12) Mythi have been variously disfigured, partly by means of the poets, especially the lyric and dramatic; partly by the industry of prophets, ciceroni, and sacrificial priests; partly by philosophical interpreters, and mythological systems. The mythic expression itself has also varied in different ages: we must therefore proceed with the utmost caution before we can regard a mythus as restored to its original form. (13) And even then the interpretation is still very hazardous; for an authentic interpretation is not to be expected, as the ancient transmitters already took it for a reality; and those who followed, explained more into than out of it. (14) (1.) Without being able to promise here the substance of all the mythological writings of Heyne, scattered over a great many years, (they begin with 1763, and continue till 1807,) I have, however, read the greater part in order to write these pages; the most copious is the last treatise, (Sermonis mythici seu symbolici interpretatio ad causas et rationes ductasque inde regulas revocata, Commentat. S. G. V., xvi.,) which I have therefore not quoted before in detail. (2.) Exactly so above, p. 9; in addition to which I only remark, that to the myth-creating people of course both appeared as homogeneous,-otherwise they could not have so come together, -namely, as the statement of actual things in the present or past. (3.) Compare, on the contrary, p. 12. (4.) The fundamental position of the whole inquiry, in my opinion. 1 N. Commtr. viii. p. 34. 2 Commtt., ii. p. 135. |