In brief, Mannhardt’s return to his old colours (1875-76) seems to have been made in a mood from which he again later passed away.  But either modern school of mythology may cite him as an ally in one or other of his phases of opinion.

PHILOLOGY AND DEMETER ERINNYS

Mr. Max Muller on Demeter Erinnys.

Like Mannhardt, our author in his new treatise discusses the strange old Arcadian myth of the horse-Demeter Erinnys (ii. 537).  He tells the unseemly tale, and asks why the Earth goddess became a mare?  Then he gives the analogous myth from the Rig-Veda, {65} which, as it stands, is ‘quite unintelligible.’  But Yaska explains that Saranyu, daughter of Tvashtri, in the form of a mare, had twins by Vivasvat, in the shape of a stallion.  Their offspring were the Asvins, who are more or less analogous in their helpful character to Castor and Pollux.  Now, can it be by accident that Saranyu in the Veda is Erinnys in Greek?  To this ‘equation,’ as we saw, Mannhardt demurred in 1877.  Who was Saranyu?  Yaska says ‘the Night;’ that was Yaska’s idea.  Mr. Max Muller adds, ’I think he is right,’ and that Saranyu is ‘the grey dawn’ (ii. 541).

‘But,’ the bewildered reader exclaims, ’Dawn is one thing and Night is quite another.’  So Yaska himself was intelligent enough to observe, ‘Night is the wife of Aditya; she vanishes at sunrise.’  However, Night in Mr. Max Muller’s system ‘has just got to be’ Dawn, a position proved thus:  ’Yaska makes this clear by saying that the time of the Asvins, sons of Saranyu, is after midnight,’ but that ’when darkness prevails over light, that is Madhyama; when light prevails over darkness, that is Aditya,’ both being Asvins.  They (the Asvins) are, in fact, darkness and light; and therefore, I understand, Saranyu, who is Night, and not an Asvin at all, is Dawn!  To make this perfectly clear, remember that the husband of Saranyu, whom she leaves at sunrise, is—­I give you three guesses—­is the Sun!  The Sun’s wife leaves the Sun at sunrise. {66} This is proved, for Aditya is Vivasvat=the Sun, and is the husband of Saranyu (ii. 541).  These methods of proving Night to be Dawn, while the substitute for both in the bed of the Sun ’may have been meant for the gloaming’ (ii. 542), do seem to be geistvolle Spiele des Witzes, ingenious jeux d’esprit, as Mannhardt says, rather than logical arguments.

But we still do not know how the horse and mare came in, or why the statue of Demeter had a horse’s head.  ’This seems simply to be due to the fact that, quite apart from this myth, the sun had, in India at least, often been conceived as a horse . . . . and the dawn had been likened to a mare.’  But how does this explain the problem?  The Vedic poets cited (ii. 542) either referred to the myth which we have to explain, or they used a poetical expression, knowing perfectly well what they meant.  As long as they knew what they meant, they could not make an unseemly fable out of a poetical phrase.  Not till after the meaning was forgotten could the myth arise.  But the myth existed already in the Veda!  And the unseemliness is precisely what we have to account for; that is our enigma.