CLASSIFICATION OF Alreus. The first important fact in mythology is that, however much we use the word mythology 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 ceidion 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 thus 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, myths of the past of man and myths to explain natural phenomena. But among the most primi tive peoples the two sorts of myths become one. A vague tradition of the wanderings of a tribe is simply united with an explanation of a physi 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 religions 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 religions myth. Thus in India the story of the deluge was told at first without any suggestion that the flood was a pun ishment of sin; later. however, it is interpreted as a 'washing 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' myths. Thus the Polynesian and Melanesian mythology is almost as rich in stories of the gods as is that of Homer, but for all that the island blacks are as savage as those of Africa. and their 'higher' mythology morels means that these are more imaginative than are the 1\lishmis and Naeharis of India, who have an active fear of devils, and a very vague idea of any other spiritual power eseept the ancestral ghost. An excellent illustration of mythology
in its lowest stages is offered by the Central Australians. Here the whole burden of myths is with the great deeds of the ances tors in the holy A Irheriaga or 'time of old.' Of real gods there is only a Creator whose ens mogonie work is briefly described as 'rutting out the world.' The Creator made the world and the half human ancestors of the tribes, but the mythology is concerned only with the latter. (gods, and especially tales of gods, come much later. If We May conclude that ancestor-deeds. and a somewhat adventitious and remote scien tific explanation of the universe as formed by a superior being or as consisting of such a being's dismembered pa rts (another popular, savage myth), ronstitute the basis of mythology. we shaIl no less truly find that the doings of the demons constitute the next stage. This phase of mythology is usually not developed beyond simple concrete performances. There is very little mysticism, and no system. .A certain devil has had a difficulty with some member of the tribe and is either driven off 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 identification. 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 bc current without any notion of relation ship between man and animal. The same is true in regard to myths about animated trees and mountains, etc. It is quite impossible to draw' a sharp line between this stage and that where denmns and animals and cult-heroes are ele vated to the position of gods, and talcs about them become part of theology.