00

CONTENTS

Commentary on Hamlet’s Mill by John Major Jenkins

Preface

Introduction

I. — The Chronicler’s Tale

II. — The Figure in Finland

III. — The Iranian Parallel

IV. — History, Myth and Reality

Intermezzo — A Guide for the Perplexed

V. — The Unfolding in India

VI. — Amlodhi’s Quern

VII. — The Many-Colored Cover

VIII. — Shamans and Smiths

IX. — Amlodhi the Titan and His Spinning Top

X. — The Twilight of the Gods

XI. —Samson Under Many Skies

XII. — Socrates’ Last Tale

XIII. — Of Time and the Rivers

XIV. — The Whirlpool

XV. — The Waters from the Deep

XVI. — The Stone and the Tree

XVII. — The Frame of the Cosmos

XVIII. — The Galaxy

XIX. — The Fall of Phaethon

XX. — The Depths of the Sea

XXI. — The Great Pan Is Dead

XXII. — The Adventure and the Quest

XXIII. — Gilgamesh and Prometheus

Epilogue: The Lost Treasure

Conclusion

Appendices

Notes

Bibliography

Index

Commentary on Hamlet’s Mill

by John Major Jenkins

**
**

From GalacticAlignment2012 Website

“But whatever fate awaits this last enterprise of my latter years (Hamlet’s Mill), and be it that of Odysseus’ last voyage, I feel comforted by the awareness that it shall be the right conclusion of a life dedicated to the search for truth.” — Giorgio de Santillana (1968:xi)

Some books are ahead of their time. Some books convey a message which threatens prevailing notions, and are therefore brushed away. Some books are mixtures of profound insights and garbled speculations. Hamlet’s Mill, An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time (1969) partakes to varying degrees in all of the above. Hamlet’s Mill began a revolution in understanding the profound sources of ancient mythology. Although it tottered on the edge of oblivion for years, it has reemerged as the fundamental inspiration for many progressive researchers who find the precession of the equinoxes lurking within ancient creation myths around the world.

The Authors

The text of Hamlet’s Mill covers 349 pages and includes another 100 pages of appendices. The authors of this thorough study are respected scholars. Hertha von Dechend was professor of the history of science at the University of Frankfurt, and a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for five winters, 1962 to 1967. For many years she emphasized in her work the relationship between ancient myth and astronomy. Giorgio de Santillana, not to be confused with the Italian philosopher George Santiyana, was for many years professor of the history and philosophy of science at M.I.T. By 1969, when Hamlet’s Mill was published, he had authored numerous articles and books (e.g., Santillana 1955, 1961, and 1968). Whatever these authors have to say should be considered in all seriousness. Santillana seems to be the primary speaker; he served as editor for von Dechend’s material and compiled other material relating to her thesis.

Hamlet’s Mill traces the transformations of mythic imagery around the globe on a search and rescue mission, to breathe life back into an archaic insight into the nature of the cosmos. It seems, admittedly, that an a priori feeling, or insight, drives the book onward to its conclusion, which is really more of a new beginning. This archaic insight is a cherished discovery of the two authors, the culmination of their academic careers, and they seem driven to quickly document and consolidate their thesis — one that von Dechend actually espoused for many years — and share it with the world. There are problems with Hamlet’s Mill, but they are more in terms of the book’s organization rather than a faulty reasoning. However, some citations, especially those of Mesoamerican myth, are somewhat off the mark. In this case, the reason may have more to do with the embryonic state of Mesoamerican studies in the 1960’s. As for other glitches, these hurried flaws can be explained when we consider the context in which the book was written. Giorgio de Santillana published a book of his own the previous year and was still lecturing at M.I.T., so his work load during the late 1960s must have been intense. In fact, he was ill at the time.

As William Irwin Thompson writes:

“Professor de Santillana worked on editing von Dechend when he was sick and near death, and so this book is not the best expression of their theories. Encyclopedic, but rambling, it is often as chaotic as it is cranky. This weakness, however, should not mislead the reader. The work is very important in seeking to recover the astronomical and cosmological dimensions of mythic narratives” (Thompson 1982:268-269).

This may explain the variations in the narrative, the ebb and flow of the sequence in which the book was ordered, and the generally chaotic character of the book’s organization. Nevertheless, the bulk of the text conveys ruthless interpretation and careful documentation of international scholarship in linguistics, archaeology, comparative mythology, and astronomy. In addition, an informal and usually engaging, if somewhat loquacious, prose style prevails throughout. Hertha von Dechend, long-time German historian and mythologist, seems to be the director behind the scenes:

“Von Dechend has argued that the astronomy of the most ancient civilizations is far more complicated than we have hitherto realized. She sees myth as the technical language of a scientific and priestly elite; when, therefore, a myth seems to be most concrete, even gross, it is often using figurative language to describe astronomical happenings . . . Von Dechend’s thesis that there is an astronomical dimension to myth that is not understood by the conventional archaeologists of myth is, I believe, quite correct” (Thompson 1982:173).

“Archaeologists of myth” is a strange statement, but what discipline does this study belong to? It certainly isn’t astronomy, because astronomy’s technicians have nothing to do with ancient myth. Is it ethnology, mythology, or science? The burgeoning field of archaeoastronomy perhaps gets closest to the mark. Since the 1970’s, two different academic journals have been devoted to elucidating and exploring the topic of archaeoastronomy. Norman Lockyear pioneered this field in the late 1800’s with the publication of The Dawn of Astronomy in 1894. The next real advance in this field came with the Stonehenge studies of Gerald S. Hawkins in the 1960’s. As a result of Hawkins’ new “astro-archaeology” picking up where Lockyear left off, and a growing academic interest in what the field had to offer, Giorgio Santillana saw fit to arrange the reprinting of Lockyear’s The Dawn of Astronomy in 1964, for the occasion of its 70th anniversary.

Much of humanity’s oldest myths were derived from celestial observations. This is probably the most important contribution that Hamlet’s Mill offers, one that has been suppressed and scoffed at for much of this century. In addition to its ancillary use in archaeoastronomy, this concept is being reclaimed as a guiding principle for those who study Maya mythology. The Maya, the most mathematically and calendrically advanced culture of the ancient New World, also preserved complex myths which are now being interpreted as referential to astronomical features and processes. For example, Maya epigrapher Linda Schele has promoted the Mayan Sacred Tree, one of the oldest motifs in Mayan myth, as a description of the intersection of the ecliptic with the Milky Way.

Many breakthroughs in this regard are recorded in books she coauthored with David Freidel and, with some amazement, she even goes as far to say,

“With that discovery, I realized that every major image from Maya cosmic symbolism was probably a map of the sky” (Freidel et al. 1993:87).

Elsewhere she writes

“The cosmic monster is also the Milky Way” (Freidel et al. 1993:87)

and, in a direct linkage of myth to the sky:

“Clearly Orion was the turtle from which the Maize God rose in his resurrection. The Milky Way rearing above the turtle had to be the Maize God appearing in his tree form as he does on the Tablet of the Cross at Palenque. The image of the first turtle really is in the sky” (Freidel et al. 1993:82).

Major mythic images describe celestial features or processes. Von Dechend was saying the same thing about Old World and Polynesian mythology decades earlier. Now that scholars have caught up with and recognized the importance of the perspective pioneered by von Dechend and de Santillana, we can look at Hamlet’s Mill with new appreciation.

Unfortunately, it is a difficult book. As one writer put it,

“Their book is rich and interesting but not easy to read. Many different themes and an extraordinarily large and diverse collection of data fold over each other in its chapters like some origami nightmare” (Krupp 1991:298).

Notice that the various commentators on Hamlet’s Mill acknowledge the value of it while noting its problems; this isn’t a question of naïve or blind acceptance of something appealingly fantastical. Neither can it be accused of New Age sensationalism as a marketing strategy, and in 1969 the age of rampant spiritual materialism was still off in the future.

Moreover, the Castaneda-style of scholarship, unprecedented in its originality and audacity, had yet to be identified. Hamlet’s Mill was a straightforward and honest attempt to elucidate a valuable aspect of ancient science and myth previously overlooked. So, in this appendix, I will sort out the wheat from the chaff, and offer a summation of the essential message of Hamlet’s Mill.

What I have felt since my first reading is that this book is groundbreaking, the beginning of a new way of understanding the origins of civilization. In the intervening twenty-five years since it was first published (it is presently still in print with David R. Godine, Publisher), other disciplines have supported its tenets in various ways. For example, the work of Marija Gimbutas, James Mellart and Riane Eisler demonstrate that there was a stylistically unified Old Europe civilization in place before the advent of “civilization as we know it” in ancient Sumer. The great mythologist Joseph Campbell spoke of this in some depth, describing the 18,000-year old Magdalenian culture as “a peaceful Golden Age.”

Despite this new information, scholars are generally cautious on new turf. Many people who have read Hamlet’s Mill are initially impressed, but soon encounter the politically dangerous nature of “speculating.” Observe the words of the Finnish-born poet Anselm Hollo:

“Then, came my encounter with Giorgio de Santillana’s astounding book Hamlet’s Mill, which resulted in a slightly embarrassing countre-temps with a Finnish ambassador to the U.S. During the ten minutes preceding my modest speculative reading of Santillana’s thoughts on the Sampo theme, at a major American city’s Kalevala Day, said ambassador delivered himself, in a manner reminiscent of Heinrich Mann’s Der Untertan, of a speech to the effect that the Kalevala was simply so great that it did not, ever, require any form of interpretation . . . it had to be taken at face value” (Hollo 1989).

This kind of treatment has no doubt had the effect of dampening the enthusiasm of many students. Whether it be politics or academics, some areas are simply “sacred ground,” not to be trampled. Usually this indicates exactly where progress can be made. The quote above mentions the Finnish national epic, the Kalevala, and the Sampo, a cosmological artifact of Central Asian shamanism (see Ervast [1916], 1998; Jenkins 1995e; Jenkins 1998a). Speaking of Ivory Towerism, Edmund Leach, a scholar of the old school, provided a rather indignant review of Hamlet’s Mill:

“(The) authors’ insistence that between about 4,000 B.C. and 100 A.D. a single archaic system prevailed throughout most of the civilized and proto-civilized world is pure fantasy. Their attempt to delineate the details of this system by a worldwide scatter of random oddments of mythology is no more than an intellectual game . . . Something like 60 percent of the text is made up of complex arguments about Indo-European etymologies which would have seemed old-fashioned as early as 1870 . . . Despite their claims to scholarship the authors avoid all reference to the currently relevant literature” (Leach 1970).

In fact, de Santillana and von Dechend do refer to contemporary literature, but point out that much “modern” scholarship is biased, built upon sand castles of past assumptions. In the 1960’s, and to a large degree still today, the prevailing notion among historians of science was that “civilization” progressed in a Darwinian model of advance, from lesser to greater sophistication. It then follows that no “primitive” culture could know things that “modern” man does not. Observe Leach’s use of the terms “civilized” and “proto-civilized”; this implicit bias precludes the possibility of socially or perceptually refined people living in the Neolithic. The well-known historian Will Durant entertains other possibilities:

“Immense volumes have been written to expound our knowledge, and conceal our ignorance, of primitive man . . . Primitive cultures were not necessarily the ancestors of our own; for all we know they may be the degenerate remnants of higher cultures that decayed when human leadership moved in the wake of the ice” (Durant, cited in Childress 1992:570).

This is not to say that Hamlet’s Mill presents some kind of Atlantis theory to explain the preponderance of similar cosmological myths around the globe. Instead, cosmological myths are understood to be stories that come from the sky, encoded maps about the arrangement of celestial features and the movement of planets and stars during the year. The universal story-board of the night sky is viewed around the globe and, in this way, similar cosmologies and metaphors arise to explain the great questions: human origins, the mystery of life, time, and death, and the exploits of deities (who are really stars and planets). Echoes of a unified Neolithic world religion? Even in Greco-Roman myth it is obvious that Saturn, Jupiter and other mytho-cosmic deities refer to planets.

Regardless of Leach’s words, which clearly illustrate the type of scholasticism threatened by Hamlet’s Mill, other reviewers were less reactionary and were even optimistic:

“Drawing on various learned disciplines, the authors have attempted to construct a master theory of myth-a theory, that is, which accounts for the appearance of identical mythical motifs in areas between which no cultural contact can be discovered or even surmised” (Atlantic)

In a clear summary of the likely impact of Hamlet’s Mill, Phoebe Adams wrote,

“This courageous enterprise has produced a difficult, disorderly (no conscientious examination of myth can be anything but disorderly), and provocative book, based on the assumption that the great international myths represent an explanation of the structure of the universe, and that this explanation — long since forgotten except in its picturesque narrative form — was actually mathematical and derived from astronomical observation. If this scandalously oversimplified description boggles imagination, let the reader not take alarm; the book is equally boggling but much more persuasive. It is likely to draw howls of protest from the scholars whose fields have been raided” (Adams 1969)

De Santillana raided his own field (the history and philosophy of science), draws from others, and, furthermore, advises his colleagues (especially mythographers) to educate themselves in basic astronomy. Another reviewer emphasized the challenge that Hamlet’s Mill posed thinkers unaccustomed to new ideas:

“[The authors] open a speculative inquiry into the origins of science that has great relevance for both the history and philosophy of science . . . This book presents an intellectual challenge to those accustomed to think of ancient Greece as the unique cradle of Western science” (Basilia 1969)

It is amazing to think, and it is a testimony to the painstakingly cautious “advance of science,” that not too long ago Greece was considered to be the “unique cradle of Western science.” Today we know that Pythagoras, Plato and other influential Greek thinkers took initiation from dying Egyptian mystery schools, whose accrued knowledge went back millennia. The cosmological and philosophical insights which those Egyptian schools afforded inspired the scientific brilliance of Greece, Byzantium and Islam as well.

Serendipitously, the final reviewer suggests that there is more to be found here, that Hamlet’s Mill is a bent key to a series of gates:

“It is natural that so rich and complex a first unriddling is flawed . . . The book is polemic, even cocky; it will make a tempest in the inkpots. It nonetheless has the ring of noble metal, although it is only a bent key to the first of many gates” (Morrison 1969)

And this is where I pick up the lead. A clear analysis will first unbend the key. I will not only be commenting on Hamlet’s Mill, but will also be interpreting it, based upon new information, and will finally tie its essential meaning to recent discoveries half-way around the globe, in the ancient calendric cosmology of the Maya. What emerges is not only an essay about a unified mythic astronomy from the archaic past but, according to this long lost perspective, an impending doorway through an uncertain collective future.

Thoughtful Presentiments of Hamlet’s Mill

As we consider the importance of Hamlet’s Mill more deeply, an appropriate thing to remember comes from the preface itself:

“Nothing is so easy to ignore as something that does not yield freely to understanding.”

In de Santillana’s preface to Reflections on Men and Ideas (1968), he mentions the new project underway, what would become Hamlet’s Mill, and writes,

“My latest productions are a definite move into a field that had long attracted me, far from ordinary research and the usual tools . . .”

These words were written in November of 1967; since Hamlet’s Mill was published in 1969, his work on it indeed must have been somewhat frenzied. With some amount of foresight he continues:

“It is the greatness of the subject that has called me, the prodigious wealth of mythical material gathered over the centuries, immense vistas of lost millenniums, of submerged cultures for which we may have found a key. Judgment must wait for our forthcoming book written in collaboration with Dr. von Dechend, An Introduction to Archaic Cosmology” (Santillana 1968:xi).

Besides this initial working title for the “essay” that became Hamlet’s Mill, another title was considered: “The Art of the Fugue,” emphasizing the image of time running through epicycles of change — a harmonic number progression — as found in Pythagorean thought. Mathematics, it is proposed, is important for the thesis — specific numbers crop up repeatedly in ancient cosmologies from India to Viking Iceland, and describe the vast periods of World Ages.

In the preface to Reflections on Men and Ideas, we discover that de Santillana tends to scornfully denounce certain episodes in the history of science. In fact, his book The Crime of Galileo was inspired by such considerations, and he compares Galileo’s trial with the trial of scientist Robert J. Oppenheimer in the 1950’s. The greatest crime is that these events were largely misinterpreted by historians themselves. He is therefore impatient with the proclamations of know-it-all scholars, who may be obscuring the truth rather than elucidating it. This style of “open dissent” characterizes de Santillana’s writing in Hamlet’s Mill as well. Combining his discoveries with von Dechend’s, he arrives at a position which is controversial. He admits that this,

“new method may yet be deemed uninsurable by our more cautious contemporaries: but that it has a point I have no doubt” (Santillana 1968:xi).

At times de Santillana’s writing breaks into admirable prose; other times it is just wordy. The “spirit of protest” directed against his colleagues is refreshing; there will be no Ivory Towerism here. De Santillana’s stance does not seem to be motivated by animosity, rather, he just seems impatient with the ploddingly cautious progress of scholarship. At the late stage of his life during which Hamlet’s Mill was written, one can understand his desire to short-circuit conventional caution and cut to the chase.

De Santillana met von Dechend in 1959, when she was Assistant to the Chair of the History of Science at the University of Frankfurt. Coming from a background of ethnology, archaeology and the history of science, she avoided astronomy completely for many years as a valid explanatory source for myth. Even in her examination of Mesopotamian myth, she was able to neatly ignore astronomical myth, saying

“everything looked so very terrestrial, though slightly peculiar” (Santillana and von Dechend (1969:ix).

Her assumptions changed when she began to study Polynesian myth, some ten thousand pages of it. She realized that “no single sentence could be understood” and admitted that the Polynesians, with their perplexing navigational skills on the open Pacific, must have known something of astronomy. Finally, the pieces of evidence were assembled and the message was clear:

“planets had to be constitutive members of every mythical personnel; the Polynesians did not invent this by themselves.”

Once she had found the key, she quickly realized that the same insight — that astronomy was the source of myth — could be applied to the shrouded meaning of other cosmological myths. Based upon this position, the importance of measure and counting was brought to the fore.

Both de Santillana and von Dechend believe that measuring preceded even the development of writing:

“Way back in time, before writing was invented, it was measures and counting that provided the armature, the frame on which the rich texture of real myth was to grow.”

Cave art in southern France from 18,000 years ago contains a figure marked with twenty-eight lines, the moon cycle. This kind of counting and measuring may indeed be the precursor to more stylized glyphic writing. With these new ideas at the ready, the “essay” to become Hamlet’s Mill demanded to be written.

Into the Whirlpool

A close look at the introduction of Hamlet’s Mill will provide a clear orientation to de Santillana’s and von Dechend’s thinking. Extracts from the jacket flap give the impression that the overall viewpoint of the book is neither outrageous nor unfounded. We also learn here why Hamlet (Shakespeare’s Hamlet), appears in the title:

“Contradicting many current notions about cultural evolution, this exploratory book investigates the origins of human knowledge in the archaic, preliterate world. Selecting Shakespeare’s Hamlet as a congenial introductory figure, the authors begin their journey proper with Amlodhi, Hamlet’s counterpart in Scandinavian myth.”

The statement “current notions about cultural evolution” refers to a type of social Darwinism in which human society today is supposed to be hierarchically more refined and advanced in every essential way than our grunting, dirty, cave dwelling, “primitive” ancestors of the Neolithic. This view is naïve; compare life in a typical Third World urban slum of today with the cosmopolitan city dwellers of Alexandria 2,000 years ago. Technology and science is not the barometer of cultural sophistication. Social Darwinism has entered the realm of cliché, although still to a surprising degree it holds currency in the underlying assumptions of many people, including scholars.

Continuing with the book jacket’s summary, we encounter the central theme of the book. The mythic Amlodhi character was the owner of a magnificent Mill. In those ancient times it ground out peace and plenty. Later, however, in decaying days, it ground out only salt.

“Now, at the bottom of the sea, it grinds rock and sand, and has created a vast whirlpool, the Maelstrom, which leads to the land of the dead. The ultimate significance of this Mill, and of many similar mythical constructions, is what the authors set themselves to discovery.”

This points us to the central idea without precisely defining it. The authors trace mythic metaphors of cosmological processes around the globe and in so doing, must compare different metaphors and identify similar motifs. One can then deduce that a story describing a hero’s journey into the belly of a giant to retrieve magical knowledge, is the same cosmological event as a shamanic journey up the sacred tree to the North Star. Mythic cosmography speaks in mixed metaphors. De Santillana and von Dechend interpret widely scattered myths with the assumption, which many now feel is essentially correct, that cosmological mythic narratives unfold, like given stories, from events observed in night sky. The most ancient myths, though cloaked in culture — specific garb or expressed via different creative metaphors, describe an identical underlying celestial map:

“The places referred to in myth are in the heavens and the actions are those of celestial bodies. Myth, in short, was a language for the perpetuation of a vast and complex body of astronomical knowledge.”

The eleven-page introduction, written by de Santillana, provides an excellent orientation to the authors’ thoughts, motivations, goals, and conclusions. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is traced back to the story of Amlohdi and from there to the Viking tale of Grotte’s Mill. The popular Norwegian fairy tale called “why the sea is salt,” recorded in the early nineteenth century, descends directly from the myth of Grotte’s Mill. The Hamlet’s Mill “essay” then moves farther afield, drawing in a huge amount of related cosmogonic imagery. We first move to Finland, where the incredible Sampo story — its forging and theft — provides detailed imagery describing a World Age shifting of the celestial “frame of time.”

From there to Iran, India, Polynesia, back to Greece, Egypt, Babylonia and China; even New World mythology fits the criteria. The entire discussion indicates that ancient people around the globe observed the slow shifting of the celestial framework, what we call the precession of the equinoxes. Among academics and without good reason, the suggestion of this knowledge in ancient times has been dismissed out of hand, and this is exactly the problem. It is considered to be so patently impossible that no rational examination of the mythic forms describing precession has ever taken place. Hamlet’s Mill is the first study to seriously address this question.

The imagery of the Sacred Mill and its owner stands for vast periods of time and the supreme ruler of the heavens, a kind of primeval demiurge not unlike the position held by Mithras. In fact, David Ulansey writes, in The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries (1989), that Mithraism arose soon after the Greek astronomer Hipparchus “discovered” precession in 128 B.C. The shifting of World Ages thereafter became a secret doctrine of the Mithraic mystery religion, and Mithras (the bull slayer) was accorded a ruling position above all previous gods. Recent advances in the true nature of Mithraism had to overcome nearly a century of bias, propagated by the erroneous ideas of Franz Cumont — another example of the double-edged sword of scholarship.

I should point out here that Mithraism developed quickly, as if filling a dormant position, and became widespread throughout the Greco-Roman empire. World Age doctrines certainly do not begin with Mithraism, so one wonders if Mithraism simply represented a new flowering of ancient knowledge. Today we have a popular astrological belief that the Age of Pisces is giving way to the Age of Aquarius. This, however, occupies a dubious place as a modern folk belief, being associated by rationalists with snake oil and magic. Mithraism is supposed to be the first proponent of this World Age thinking, so the astrological belief of World Ages theoretically must be traced to Mithraism. Since precession was allegedly “discovered” by Hipparchus just prior to the founding of Mithraism, it should go no further than that. However, Mithraism was an extremely secretive religion, and the central mystery could not be revealed under penalty of death.

This is why its true nature eluded scholars up until just recently. Furthermore, the numbers associated with astrological ages and estimates of precession appear much earlier than Greece — back to Egypt and even in the earliest mathematical formulations of Sumer. In fact, the key numbers of Babylonian-Sumerian mathematics (including the sixty-based system still being used) were derived from astronomical observations, and point us to the traditional estimate of precession: 108 x 4 x 60 = 25,920 years. These numbers also appear in the Hindu Ages of Kali. In comparison, Hipparchus estimated the complete precessional cycle to be 36,000 years. Clearly, precessional knowledge and the attendant World Age doctrine are much older than Greek astronomy and Mithraism.

In the introduction to Hamlet’s Mill, de Santillana also mentions some very ancient ideas about Ursa Major, the Milky Way, and the Pole Star, writing,

“These notions appear to all have a common doctrine in the age before history . . . born of the great intellectual and technological revolution of the late Neolithic period” (Santillana and von Dechend 1969:3).

Time and time again we must remind ourselves of how little we know of ancient human society, and how much we assume. Can we really conceive of what life and thought were like 7,000 years ago? The material data collected from archaeological digs paint a pretty shabby picture of Neolithic life — an assertion that any gaudy museum diarama will attest to. How can we reconstruct the perceptions, myths, and intellectual life of these far off people of the dim past?

Knowing that human beings have, basically, remained unchanged for at least 40,000 years, how can we say that our remote ancestors could not observe the subtle celestial shifting of precession? Our concept of how difficult this might be is tempered by the problems of our own age, when the skies are obscured by smog and light pollution, when basic math skills are the property of the few, and no one has the time or inclination to read and explore the obscure depths of human history. If we can admit that our remote ancestors were intelligent enough to conceive of this majestic and complex doctrine of World Ages, we might allow ourselves to be smart enough to let go of destructive tendencies and move into a healthier new era.

Other scholars have since concurred with the basic premise of Hamlet’s Mill, that mythology and astronomy go hand in hand. Joseph Campbell even goes so far as to point out that the numbers associated with the ending of world, as recorded in the Icelandic Eddas, are identical to the numbers used in Hindu World Age calculations, and both ultimately refer to precession. Campbell presents this finding in several different books and tapes (most notably, in The Inner Reaches of Outer Space), yet this important aspect of his work has been characteristically ignored. We also have the viewpoint of William Irwin Thompson in his book The Time Falling Bodies Take To Light, which provides a rich elucidation of this whole perspective. The growing trend among mythologists, historians, and other researchers into humanity’s past is to:

1) allow ancient people to be intelligent and perceptive

2) understand that myth and astronomy are interwoven

3) allow for the possibility that we are just learning to recognize the genius of ancient civilizations, and we can learn from them.

Major contributions to this perspective are implicit in the work of Linda Schele and David Freidel. In their books Forest of Kings (1990) and Maya Cosmos (1993), their methods of studying Maya writing, mythological symbolism and cosmology had to evolve to meet the challenge; confronted with a level of sophistication barely allowed for in former approaches to the subject, they adapted new strategies and new perspectives to help them understand the genius of the Maya. The greatest fruit of this change in methodology includes acknowledging that myth describes the sky. With such an understanding, a term like “archaic mono-myth” simply means that one myth or “model” may have prevailed around the globe in ancient times simply because everyone everywhere got their knowledge from the starry sky.

The authors of Hamlet’s Mill feel they have made a step toward “breaking the code” of archaic cosmogonic symbolism, tracing it back to an astronomical explanation of the familiar themes that describe the world’s origins:

“The theory about “how the world began” seems to involve the breaking asunder of a harmony, a kind of cosmogonic “original sin” whereby the circle of the ecliptic . . . was tilted up at an angle with respect to the equator, and the cycles of change came into being” (Santillana and von Dechend 1969:5)

What they describe here, and elsewhere more precisely, is a specific era some 6,500 years ago when the position of the equinoctial sun was aligned with the band of the Milky Way. This provided an obvious celestial alignment, occurring twice a year on the equinoxes, when the sun would conjunct the Milky Way — the Bridge Out of Time — opening the way out of the plane of the living (the zodiac) and up to the cosmic center and source in heaven. A “breaking asunder” occurred when this great cosmogonic picture began to precess out of alignment. Presumably, when the “untuning of the sky” occurred, increasing social tension followed, leading to greater collective confusion and our descent into history. This simple summary is intriguing in itself, and is supported by evidence presented in Hamlet’s Mill at every step of the way. Some of the problems and questions this scenario evokes will be addressed as we proceed. For example, Hamlet’s Mill asserts that as a result of precession the zodiac was tilted up with respect to the celestial equator, “and the cycles of change came into being.”

However, I am not convinced that, in the minds of the ancient skywatchers, time “came into being” because of this particular event. It certainly could have led to a destabilization of the core institutions then in place, for example, the concept of the Earth-Mother-Goddess as the highest life principle. But I do not see it as a reason for the origin of time itself. It probably led to a belief that traditions formerly held to be “graven in stone” are indeed changeable. It could also have been seen as a great apocalyptic crisis — the destabilization of the corner pillars of the sky in respect to the center — such that one could only set sights on some far future time when the sky would realign itself and a new Golden Age could begin.

These ideas certainly remind us of the Flood, Greek thought, World Age destruction in Siberian shamanism, the adventures of Gilgamesh, the descent of Innana, and thus these cosmological ideas are not isolated or unfounded constructs. Nevertheless, the “untuning of the sky” was an actual astronomical occurrence. The whole goal of Hamlet’s Mill was to collect and interpret the world’s most ancient myths in light of the fact of this astronomical event in the Neolithic, and the assumption that human beings back then were sophisticated enough to notice it.

The introduction travels down many byways as de Santillana recounts his journey of discovery through related research, trivia and obscure quotes. He sets the stage, readying us for the journey, with his final words,

“. . . there is still some daylight left in which to undertake this first quick reconnaissance. It will necessarily leave out great and significant areas of material, but even so, it will investigate many unexpected byways and crannies of the past” (Santillana and von Dechend 1969:11)

Now, scholars are finally beginning to honor the contribution of de Santillana and von Dechend. A progressive and profound interpretation of ancient science and mythology was put forward in Hamlet’s Mill. The next great alignment in this cosmological scheme which I call the archaic mono-myth is not only right around the corner, but was anticipated by the ancient Maya, as evidenced by the Maya calendar end-date, December 21, 2012 A.D.

Preface

**AS THE SENIOR, if least deserving, of the authors, I shall open the **narrative.

Over many years I have searched for the point where myth and science join. It was clear to me for a long time that the origins of science had their deep roots in a particular myth, that of invariance.

The Greeks, as early as the 7th century B.C., spoke of the quest of their first sages as the Problem of the One and the Many, sometimes describing the wild fecundity of nature as the way in which the Many could be deduced from the One, sometimes seeing the Many as unsubstantial variations being played on the One. The oracular sayings of Heraclitus the Obscure do nothing but illustrate with shimmering paradoxes the illusory quality of “things” in flux as they were wrung from the central intuition of unity. Before him Anaximander had announced, also oracularly, that the cause of things being born and perishing is their mutual injustice to each other in the order of time, “as is meet,” he said, for they are bound to atone forever for their mutual injustice. This was enough to make of Anaximander the acknowledged father of physical science, for the accent is on the real “Many.” But it was true science after a fashion.

Soon after, Pythagoras taught, no less oracularly, that “things are numbers.” Thus mathematics was born. The problem of the origin of mathematics has remained with us to this day. In his high old age, Bertrand Russell has been driven to avow:

“I have wished to know how the stars shine. I have tried to apprehend the Pythagorean power by which number holds sway above the flux. A little of this, but not much, I have achieved.”

The answers that he found, very great answers, concern the nature of logical clarity, but not of philosophy proper. The problem of number remains to perplex us, and from it all of metaphysics was born. As a historian, I went on investigating the “gray origins” of science, far into its pre-Greek beginnings, and how philosophy was born of it, to go on puzzling us. I condensed it into a small book, The Origins of Scientific Thought. For both philosophy and science came from that fountainhead; and it is clear that both were children of the same myth. [1] In a number of studies, I continued to pursue it under the name of “scientific rationalism”; and I tried to show that through all the immense developments, the “Mirror of Being” is always the object of true science, a metaphor which still attempts to reduce the Many to the One. We now make many clear distinctions, and have come to separate science from philosophy utterly, but what remains at the core is still the old myth of eternal invariance, ever more remotely and subtly articulated, and what lies beyond it is a multitude of procedures and technologies, great enough to have changed the face of the world and to have posed terrible questions. But they have not answered a single philosophical question, which is what myth once used to do.

If we come to think of it, we have been living in the age of Astronomical Myth until yesterday. The careful and rigorous edifice of Ptolemy’s Almagest is only window dressing for Plato’s theology, disguised as elaborate science. The heavenly bodies are moving in “cycle and epicycle, orb in orb” of a mysterious motion according to the divine decree that circular motions ever more intricate would account for the universe. And Newton himself, once he had accounted for it, simply replaced the orbs with the understandable force of gravitation, for which he “would feign no hypotheses.” The hand of God was still the true motive force; God’s will and God’s own mathematics went on, another name for Aristotle’s Prime Mover. And shall we deny that Einstein’s space-time is nothing other than a pure pan-mathematical myth, openly acknowledged at last as such?

I was at this point, lost between science and myth, when, on the occasion of a meeting in Frankfurt in 1959, I met Dr. von Dechend, one of the last pupils of the great Frobenius, whom I had known; and with her I recalled his favorite saying: “What the I hell should I care for my silly notions of yesterday?” We were friends from the start. She was then Assistant to the Chair of the History of Science, but she had pursued her lonely way into cultural ethnology, starting in West Africa on the tracks of her “Chef,” which were being opened up again at the time by that splendid French ethnologist, the late Marcel Griaule. She too had a sense that the essence of myth should be sought somewhere in Plato rather than in psychology, but as yet she had no clue.

By the time of our meeting she had shifted her attention to Polynesia, and soon she hit pay dirt. As she looked into the archaeological remains on many islands, a clue was given to her. The moment of grace came when, on looking (on a map) at two little islands, mere flyspecks on the waters of the Pacific, she found that a strange accumulation of maraes or cult places could be explained only one way: they, and only they, were both exactly sited on two neat celestial coordinates: the Tropics of Cancer and of Capricorn.

Now let Dechend take over the narrative:

“To start from sheer opposition to ruling opinions is not likely to lead to sensible insight, at least so we think. But anyhow, I did not start from there, although there is no denying that my growing wrath about the current interpretations (based upon discouraging translations) was a helpful spur now and then. In that, there was nothing that could be called a ‘start,’ least of all the intention to explore the astronomical nature of myth. To the contrary, on my side, having come from ethnology to the history of science, there existed ‘in the beginning’ only the firm decision never to become involved in astronomical matters, under any condition. In order to keep safely away from this frightening field, my subject of inquiry was meant to be the mythical figure of the craftsman god, the Demiurge in his many aspects (Hephaistos, Tvashtri, Wayland the Smith, Goibniu, Ilmarinen, Ptah, Khnum, Kothar-wa-Hasis, Enki/Ea, Tane, Viracocha, etc.). Not even a whiff of suspicion came to me during the investigation of Mesopotamian myth — of all cultures! — everything looked so very terrestrial, though slightly peculiar.

It was after having spent more than a year over at least 10,000 pages of Polynesian myths collected in the 19th century (there are many more pages available than these) that the annihilating recognition of our complete ignorance came down upon me like a sledge hammer: there was no single sentence that could be understood. But then, if anybody was entitled to be taken seriously, it had to be the Polynesians guiding their ships securely over the largest ocean of our globe, navigators to whom our much praised discoverers from Magellan to Captain Cook confided the steering of their ships more than once. Thus, the fault had to rest with us, not with Polynesian myth.

Still, I did not then ’try astronomy for a change’ — there was a strict determination on my part to avoid this field. I looked into the archaeological remains of the many islands, and there a clue was given to me (to call it being struck by lightning would be more correct) which I duly followed up, and then there was no salvation anymore: astronomy could not be escaped. First it was still ‘simple’ geometry — the orbit of the sun, the Tropics, the seasons — and the adventures of gods and heroes did not make much more sense even then. Maybe one should count, for a change? What could it mean, when a hero was on his way slightly more than two years, ‘returning’ at intervals, ‘falling into space,’ coming off the ‘right’ route? There remained, indeed, not many possible solutions: it had to be planets (in the particular case of Aukele-nui a-iku, Mars). If so, planets had to be constitutive members of every mythical personnel; the Polynesians did not invent this trait by themselves.”

This text of Professor von Dechend, in its intellectual freedom and audacity, bears the stamp of her inheritance from the heroic and innocent and cosmopolitan age of German science around the eighteen-thirties. Its heroes, Justus von Liebig and Friedrich Woehler, were the objects of her work done before 1953. Another of those virtues, scornful indignation, will come to the fore in the appendices, which are so largely the product of her efforts.

Now I resume:

Years before, I had once looked at Dupuis’ L’Origine de tous les cultes, lost in the stacks of Widener Library, never again consulted. It was a book in the 18th-century style, dated “An III de la Republique.”

The title was enough to make one distrustful — one of those “enthusiastic” titles which abounded in the 18th century and promised far too much. How could it explain the Egyptian system, I thought, since hieroglyphics had not yet been deciphered? (Athanasius Kircher was later to show us how it was done out of Coptic tradition.) I had dropped the forbidding tome, only jotting down a sentence: “Le mythe est né de la science; la science seule l’expliquera.” I had the answer there, but I was not ready to understand.

This time I was able to grasp the idea at a glance, because I was ready for it. Many, many years before, I had questioned myself, in a note, about the meaning of fact in the crude empirical sense, as applied to the ancients. It represents, I thought, not their intellectual surprise, not the direct wonder and astonishment, but first of all an immense, steady, minute attention to the seasons. What is a solstice or an equinox? It stands for the capacity of coherence, deduction, imaginative intention and reconstruction with which we could hardly credit our forefathers. And yet there it was. I saw.

Mathematics was moving up to me from the depth of centuries; not after myth, but before it. Not armed with Greek rigor, but with the imagination of astrological power, with the understanding of astronomy. Number gave the key. Way back in time, before writing was even invented, it was measures and counting that provided the armature, the frame on which the rich texture of real myth was to grow.

Thus we had returned to the true beginnings, in the Neolithic Revolution. We agreed that revolution was essentially technological. The earliest social scientist, Democritus of Abdera, put it in one striking sentence: men’s progress was the work not of the mind but of the hand. His late successors have taken him too literally, and concentrated on artifacts. They have been unaware of the enormous intellectual effort involved, from metallurgy to the arts, but especially in astronomy. The effort of sorting out and identifying the only presences which totally eluded the action of our hands led to those pure objects of contemplation, the stars in their courses. The Greeks would not have misapprehended that effort: they called astronomy the Royal Science. The effort at organizing the cosmos took shape from the supernal presences, those alone which thought might put in control of reality, those from which all arts took their meaning.

But nothing is so easy to ignore as something that does not yield freely to understanding. Our science of the past flowered in the fullness of time into philology and archaeology, as learned volumes on ancient philosophy have continued to pour forth, to little avail. A few masters of our own time have rediscovered these “preliterate” accomplishments. Now Dupuis, Kircher and Boll are gone like those archaic figures, and are equally forgotten. That is the devouring way of time. The iniquity of oblivion blindly scattereth her poppies.

It is well known how many images of the gods have to do with the making of fire, and an American engineer, J. D. McGuire, discovered that also certain Egyptian images, until then unsuspected, presented deities handling a fire drill. Simple enough: fire itself was the link between what the gods did and what man could do. But from there, the mind had once been able to move on to prodigious feats of intellect. That world of the mind was fully worthy of those Newtons and Einsteins long forgotten — those masters, as d’ Alembert put it, of whom we know nothing, and to whom we owe everything.

We had the idea. It was simple and clear. But we realized that we would run into formidable difficulties, both from the point of view of modern, current scholarship and from the no less unfamiliar approach needed for method. I called it playfully, for short, “the cat on the keyboard,” for reasons that will appear presently. For how can one catch time on the wing? And yet the flow of time, the time of music, was of the essence, inescapable, baffling to the systematic mind. I searched at length for an inductive way of presentation. It was like piling Pelion upon Ossa. And yet this was the least of our difficulties. For we also had to face a wall, a veritable Berlin Wall, made of indifference, ignorance, and hostility. Humboldt, that wise master, said it long ago: First, people will deny a thing; then they will belittle it; then they will decide that it had been known long ago. Could we embark upon an enormous task of detailed scholarship on the basis of this more than dubious prospect? But our own task was set: to rescue those intellects of the past, distant and recent, from oblivion. “Thus saith the Lord God: ‘Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live’.” Such poor scattered bones, ossa vehementer sicca, we had to revive.

This book reflects the gradually deepening conviction that, first of all, respect is due these fathers of ours. The early chapters will make, I think, for easy reading. Gradually, as we move above timberline, the reader will find himself beset by difficulties which are not of our making. They are the inherent difficulties of a science which was fundamentally reserved, beyond our conception. Most frustrating, we could not use our good old simple catenary logic, in which principles come first and deduction follows. This was not the way of the archaic thinkers. They thought rather in terms of what we might call a fugue, in which all notes cannot be constrained into a single melodic scale, in which one is plunged directly into the midst of things and must follow the temporal order created by their thoughts. It is, after all, in the nature of music that the notes cannot all be played at once. The order and sequence, the very meaning, of the composition will reveal themselves — with patience — in due time. The reader, I suggest, will have to place himself in the ancient “Order of Time.”

Troilus expressed the same idea in a different image: “He that will have a cake out of the wheat must needs tarry the grinding.”

GIORGIO DE SANTILLANA

__________

Notes

1 The Pythagorean problem is at the core of my Origins. My efforts came eventually to fruition in my Prologue to Parmenides of 1964 (reprinted in Reflections on Men and Ideas (1968), p. 80).

Introduction

The unbreakable fetters which
bound down the Great Wolf
Fenrir had been cunningly
forged by Loki from these: the
footfall of a cat, the roots of a
rock, the beard of a woman, the
breath of a fish, the spittle of a
bird. The Edda

Toute vue des choses qui n’est
pas étrange est fausse.

VALERY

THIS IS meant to be only an essay. It is a first reconnaissance of a realm well-nigh unexplored and uncharted. From whichever way one enters it, one is caught in the same bewildering circular complexity, as in a labyrinth, for it has no deductive order in the abstract sense, but instead resembles an organism tightly closed in itself, or even better, a monumental “Art of the Fugue.”

The figure of Hamlet as a favorable starting point came by chance. Many other avenues offered themselves, rich in strange symbols and beckoning with great images, but the choice went to Hamlet because he led the mind on a truly inductive quest through a familiar landscape — and one which has the merit of its literary setting. Here is a character deeply present to our awareness, in whom ambiguities and uncertainties, tormented self-questioning and dispassionate insight give a presentiment of the modern mind. His personal drama was that he had to be a hero, but still try to avoid the role Destiny assigned him. His lucid intellect remained above the conflict of motives — in other words, his was and is a truly contemporary consciousness. And yet this character whom the poet made one of us, the first unhappy intellectual, concealed a past as a legendary being, his features predetermined, pre-shaped by long standing myth. There was a numinous aura around him, and many clues led up to him. But it was a surprise to find behind the mask an ancient and all-embracing cosmic power — the original master of the dreamed-of first age of the world.

Yet in all his guises he remained strangely himself. The original Amlodhi, [* The indulgence of specialists is asked for the form of certain transliterations throughout the text; for example, Amlodhi instead of Amlodi, Grotte instead of Grotti, etc. (Ed.)] as his name was in Icelandic legend, shows the same characteristics of melancholy and high intellect. He, too, is a son dedicated to avenge his father, a speaker of cryptic but inescapable truths, an elusive carrier of Fate who must yield once his mission is accomplished and sink once more into concealment in the depths of time to which he belongs: Lord of the Golden Age, the Once and Future King.

This essay will follow the figure farther and farther afield, from the Northland to Rome, from there to Finland, Iran, and India; he will appear again unmistakably in Polynesian legend. Many other Dominations and Powers will materialize to frame him within the proper order.

Amlodhi was identified, in the crude and vivid imagery of the Norse, by the ownership of a fabled mill which, in his own time, ground out peace and plenty. Later, in decaying times, it ground out salt; and now finally, having landed at the bottom of the sea, it is grinding rock and sand, creating a vast whirlpool, the Maelstrom (i.e., the grinding stream, from the verb mala, “to grind”), which is supposed to be a way to the land of the dead. This imagery stands, as the evidence develops, for an astronomical process, the secular shifting of the sun through the signs of the zodiac which determines world-ages, each numbering thousands of years. Each age brings a World Era, a Twilight of the Gods. Great structures collapse; pillars topple which supported the great fabric; floods and cataclysms herald the shaping of a new world.

The image of the mill and its owner yielded elsewhere to more sophisticated ones, more adherent to celestial events. In Plato’s powerful mind, the figure stood out as the Craftsman God, the Demiurge, who shaped the heavens; but even Plato did not escape the idea he had inherited, of catastrophes and the periodic rebuilding of the world.

Tradition will show that the measures of a new world had to be procured from the depths of the celestial ocean and tuned with the measures from above, dictated by the “Seven Sages,” as they are often cryptically mentioned in India and elsewhere. They turn out to be the Seven Stars of Ursa, which are normative in all cosmological alignments on the starry sphere. These dominant stars of the Far North are peculiarly but systematically linked with those which are considered the operative powers of the cosmos, that is, the planets as they move in different placements and configurations along the zodiac. The ancient Pythagoreans, in their conventional language, called the two Bears the Hands of Rhea (the Lady of Turning Heaven), and called the planets the Hounds of Persephone, Queen of the Underworld. Far away to the south, the mysterious ship Argo with its Pilot star held the depths of the past; and the Galaxy was the Bridge out of Time. These notions appear to have been common doctrine in the age before history — all over the belt of high civilizations around our globe. They also seem to have been born of the great intellectual and technological revolution of the late Neolithic period.

The intensity and richness, the coincidence of details, in this cumulative thought have led to the conclusion that it all had its origin in the Near East. It is evident that this indicates a diffusion of ideas to an extent hardly countenanced by current anthropology. But this science, although it has dug up a marvelous wealth of details, has been led by its modern evolutionary and psychological bent to forget about the main source of myth, which was astronomy — the Royal Science. This obliviousness is itself a recent turn of events — barely a century old. Today expert philologists tell us that Saturn and Jupiter are names of vague deities, subterranean or atmospheric, superimposed on the planets at a “late” period; they neatly sort out folk origins and “late” derivations, all unaware that planetary periods, sidereal and synodic, were known and rehearsed in numerous ways by celebrations already traditional in archaic times. If a scholar has never known those periods even from elementary science, he is not in the best position to recognize them when they come up in his material.

Ancient historians would have been aghast had they been told that obvious things were to become unnoticeable. Aristotle was proud to state it as known that the gods were originally stars, even if popular fantasy had later obscured this truth. Little as he believed in progress, he felt this much had been secured for the future. He could not guess that W. D. Ross, his modern editor, would condescendingly annotate: “This is historically untrue.” Yet we know that Saturday and Sabbath had to do with Saturn, just as Wednesday and Mercredi had to do with Mercury. Such names are as old as time; as old, certainly, as the planetary heptagram of the Harranians. They go back far before Professor Ross’ Greek philology. The inquiries of great and meticulous scholars such as Ideler, Lepsius, Chwolson, Boll and, to go farther back, of Athanasius Kircher and Petavius, had they only been read carefully, and noted, would have taught several relevant lessons to the historians of culture, but interest shifted to other goals, as can be seen from current anthropology, which has built up its own idea of the “primitive” and what came after.

One still reads in that most unscientific of records, the Bible, that God disposed all things by number, weight and measure; ancient Chinese texts say that “the calendar and the pitch pipes have such a close fit, that you could not slip a hair between them.” People read it, and think nothing of it. Yet such hints might reveal a world of vast and firmly established complexity, infinitely different from ours. But the experts now are benighted by the current folk fantasy, which is the belief that they are beyond all this — critics without nonsense and extremely wise.

In 1959 I wrote:

The dust of centuries had settled upon the remains of this great world-wide archaic construction when the Greeks came upon the scene. Yet something of it survived in traditional rites, in myths and fairy tales no longer understood. Taken verbally, it matured the bloody cults intended to procure fertility, based on the belief in a dark universal force of an ambivalent nature, which seems now to monopolize our interest. Yet its original themes could flash out again, preserved almost intact, in the later thought of the Pythagoreans and of Plato.

But they are tantalizing fragments of a lost whole. They make one think of those “mist landscapes” of which Chinese painters are masters, which show here a rock, here a gable, there the tip of a tree, and leave the rest to imagination. Even when the code shall have yielded, when the techniques shall be known, we cannot expect to gauge the thought of those remote ancestors of ours, wrapped as it is in its symbols.

Their words are no more heard again Through lapse of many ages . . .

We think we have now broken part of that code. The thought behind these constructions of the high and far-off times is also lofty, even if its forms are strange. The theory about “how the world began” seems to involve the breaking asunder of a harmony, a kind of cosmogonic “original sin” whereby the circle of the ecliptic (with the zodiac) was tilted up at an angle with respect to the equator, and the cycles of change came into being.

This is not to suggest that this archaic cosmology will show any great physical discoveries, although it required prodigious feats of concentration and computing. What it did was to mark out the unity of the universe, and of man’s mind, reaching out to its farthest limits. Truly, man is doing the same today.

Einstein said:

“What is inconceivable about the universe, is that it should be at all conceivable.”

Man is not giving up. When he discovers remote galaxies by the million, and then those quasi-stellar radio sources billions of light-years away which confound his speculation, he is happy that he can reach out to those depths. But he pays a terrible price for his achievement. The science of astrophysics reaches out on a grander and grander scale without losing its footing. Man as man cannot do this. In the depths of space he loses himself and all notion of his significance. He is unable to fit himself into the concepts of today’s astrophysics short of schizophrenia. Modern man is facing the non-conceivable. Archaic man, however, kept a firm grip on the conceivable by framing within his cosmos an order of time and an eschatology that made sense to him and reserved a fate for his soul. Yet it was a prodigiously vast theory, with no concessions to merely human sentiments. It, too, dilated the mind beyond the bearable, although without destroying man’s role in the cosmos. It was a ruthless metaphysics.

Not a forgiving universe, not a world of mercy. That surely not. Inexorable as the stars in their courses, miserationis parcissimae, the Romans used to say. Yet it was a world somehow not unmindful of man, one in which there was an accepted place for everything, rightfully and not only statistically, where no sparrow could fall unnoted, and where even what was rejected through its own error would not go down to eternal perdition; for the order of Number and Time was a total order preserving all, of which all were members, gods and men and animals, trees and crystals and even absurd errant stars, all subject to law and measure.

This is what Plato knew, who could still speak the language of archaic myth. He made myth consonant with his thought, as he built the first modern philosophy. We have trusted his clues as landmarks even on occasions when he professes to speak “not quite seriously.” He gave us a first rule of thumb; he knew what he was talking about.

Behind Plato there stands the imposing body of doctrine attributed to Pythagoras, some of its formulation uncouth, but rich with the prodigious content of early mathematics, pregnant with a science and a metaphysics that were to flower in Plato’s time. From it come such words as “theorem,” “theory,” and “philosophy.” This in its turn rests on what might be called a proto-Pythagorean phase, spread all over the East but with a focus in Susa. And then there was something else again, the stark numerical computing of Babylon. From it all came that strange principle: “Things are numbers.” Once having grasped a thread going back in time, then the test of later doctrines with their own historical developments lies in their congruence with tradition preserved intact even if half understood. For there are seeds which propagate themselves along the jetstream of time.

And universality is in itself a test when coupled with a firm design. When something found, say, in China turns up also in Babylonian astrological texts, then it must be assumed to be relevant, for it reveals a complex of uncommon images which nobody could claim had risen independently by spontaneous generation.

Take the origin of music. Orpheus and his harrowing death may be a poetic creation born in more than one instance in diverse places. But when characters who do not play the lyre but blow pipes get themselves flayed alive for various absurd reasons, and their identical end is rehearsed on several continents, then we feel we have got hold of something, for such stories cannot be linked by internal sequence. And when the Pied Piper turns up both in the medieval German myth of Hamelin and in Mexico long before Columbus, and is linked in both places with certain attributes like the color red, it can hardly be a coincidence. Generally, there is little that finds its way into music by chance.

Again, when one finds numbers like 108, or 9 X 13, reappearing under several multiples in the Vedas, in the temples of Angkor, in Babylon, in Heraclitus’ dark utterances, and also in the Norse Valhalla, it is not accident.

There is one way of checking signals thus scattered in early data, in lore, fables and sacred texts. What we have used for sources may seem strange and disparate, but the sifting was considered, and it had its reasons. Those reasons will be given later in the chapter on method. I might call it comparative morphology. The reservoir of myth and fable is great, but there are morphological “markers” for what is not mere storytelling of the kind that comes naturally. There is also wonderfully preserved archaic material in “secondary” primitives, like American Indians and West Africans. Then there are courtly stories and annals of dynasties which look like novels: the Feng Shen Yen I, the Japanese Nihongi, the Hawaiian Kumu lipo. These are not merely fantasy-ridden fables.

In hard and perilous ages, what information should a well-born man entrust to his eldest son? Lines of descent surely, but what else? The memory of an ancient nobility is the means of preserving the arcana imperii, the arcana legis and the arcana mundi, just as it was in ancient Rome. This is the wisdom of a ruling class. The Polynesian chants taught in the severely restricted Whare-wiinanga were mostly astronomy. That is what a liberal education meant then.

Sacred texts are another great source. In our age of print one is tempted to dismiss these as religious excursions into homiletics, but originally they represented a great concentration of attention on material which had been distilled for relevancy through a long period of time and which was considered worthy of being committed to memory generation after generation. The tradition of Celtic Druidism was delivered not only in songs, but also in tree-lore which was much like a code. And in the East, out of complicated games based on astronomy, there developed a kind of shorthand which became the alphabet.

As we follow the clues — stars, numbers, colors, plants, forms, verse, music, structures — a huge framework of connections is revealed at many levels. One is inside an echoing manifold where everything responds and everything has a place and a time assigned to it. This is a true edifice, something like a mathematical matrix, a World-Image that fits the many levels, and all of it kept in order by strict measure. It is measure that provides the counter-check, for there is much that can be identified and re-disposed from rules like the old Chinese saying about the pitch pipes and the calendar. When we speak of measures, it is always some form of Time that provides them, starting from two basic ones, the solar year and the octave, and going down from there in many periods and intervals, to actual weights and sizes. What modern man attempted in the merely conventional metric system has archaic precedents of great complexity. Down the centuries there comes an echo of Al-Biruni’s wondering a thousand years ago, when that prince of scientists discovered that the Indians, by then miserable astronomers, calculated aspects and events by means of stars — and were not able to show him any one star that he asked for. Stars had become items for them, as they were to become again for Leverrier and Adams, who never troubled to look at Neptune in their life although they had computed and discovered it in 1847.

The Mayas and the Aztecs in their unending calculations seem to have had similar attitudes. The connections were what counted. Ultimately so it was in the archaic universe, where all things were signs and signatures of each other, inscribed in the hologram, to be divined subtly. And Number dominated them all (appendix #1).

This ancient world moves a little closer if one recalls two great transitional figures who were simultaneously archaic and modern in their habits of thought. The first is Johannes Kepler, who was of the old order in his unremitting calculations and his passionate devotion to the dream of rediscovering the “Harmony of the Spheres.” But he was a man of his own time, and also of ours, when this dream began to prefigure the polyphony that led up to Bach. In somewhat the same way, our strictly scientific world view has its counterpart in what John Hollander, the historian of music, has described as “The Untuning of the Sky.” The second transitional figure is no less a man than Sir Isaac Newton, the very inceptor of the rigorously scientific view. There is no real paradox in mentioning Newton in this connection. John Maynard Keynes, who knew Newton as well as many of our time, said of him:

Newton was not the first of the Age of Reason. He was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and Sumerians, the last great mind which looked out on the visible and intellectual world with the same eyes as those who began to build our intellectual world rather less than 10,000 years ago . . . Why do I call him a magician? Because he looked on the whole universe and all that is in it as a riddle, as a secret which could be read by applying pure thought to certain evidence, certain mystic clues which God had laid about the world to allow a sort of philosopher’s treasure hunt to the esoteric brotherhood. He believed that these clues were to be found partly in the evidence of the heavens and in the constitution of elements (and that is what gives the false suggestion of his being an experimental natural philosopher), but also partly in certain papers and traditions handed down by the brethren in an unbroken chain back to the original cryptic revelation in Babylonia. He regarded the universe as a cryptogram set by the Almighty — just as he himself wrapt the discovery of the calculus in a cryptogram when he communicated with Leibniz. By pure thought, by concentration of mind, the riddle, he believed, would be revealed to the initiate. [“Newton the Man,” in The Royal Society. Newton Tercentenary Celebrations (1947), p. 29.].

Lord Keynes’ appraisal, written ca. 1942, remains both unconventional and profound. He knew, we all know, that Newton failed. Newton was led astray by his dour sectarian preconceptions. But his undertaking was truly in the archaic spirit, as it begins to appear now after two centuries of scholarly search into many cultures of which he could have had no idea. To the few clues he found .with rigorous method, a vast number have been added. Still, the wonder remains, the same that was expressed by his great predecessor Galileo:

But of all other stupendous inventions, what sublimity of mind must have been his who conceived how to communicate his most secret thoughts to any other person, though very far distant either in time or place, speaking with those who are in the Indies, speaking to those who are not yet born, nor shall be this thousand or ten thousand years? And with no greater difficulty than the various arrangement of two dozen little signs upon paper? Let this be the seal of all the admirable inventions of man.

Way back in the 6th century A.D., Gregoire de Tours was writing: “The mind has lost its cutting edge, we hardly understand the Ancients.” So much more today, despite our wallowing in mathematics for the million and in sophisticated technology.

It is undeniable that, notwithstanding our Classics Departments’ labors, the wilting away of classical studies, the abandonment of any living familiarity with Greek and Latin has cut the ompha loessa, the umbilical cord which connected our culture — at least at its top level — with Greece, in the same manner in which men of the Pythagorean and Orphic tradition were tied up through Plato and a few others with the most ancient Near East. It is beginning to appear that this destruction is leading into a very up-to-date Middle Ages, much worse than the first. People will sneer: “Stop the World, I want to get off.” It cannot be changed, however; this is the way it goes when someone or other tampers with the reserved knowledge that science is, and was meant to represent.

But, as Goethe said at the very onset of the Progressive Age,

“It is still day, let men get up and going — the night creeps in, when there is nothing doing.”

There might come once more some kind of “Renaissance” out of the hopelessly condemned and trampled past, when certain ideas come to life again, and we should not deprive our grandchildren of a last chance at the heritage of the highest and farthest-off times. And if, as looks infinitely probable, even that last chance is passed up in the turmoil of progress, why then one can still think with Poliziano, who was himself a master humanist, that there will be men whose minds find a refuge in poetry and art and the holy tradition “which alone make men free from death and turn them to eternity, so long as the stars will go on, still shining over a world made forever silent.” Right now, there is still left some daylight in which to undertake this first quick reconnaissance. It will necessarily leave out great and significant areas of material, but even so, it will investigate many unexpected byways and crannies of the past.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackerman, Phyllis. “The Dawn of Religion,” in Forgotten Religions, V. Fermi, ed. New York, 1950.

Aelianus. De natura, animalium, A. F. Scholfield, trans. 1958, 1959, 3 vols. LCL.

Afrikanistiche Studien. Diedrich Westermann zum 80. Geburtstag ge widmet, J. Lukas, ed. Berlin, 1955.

—. “The Mouth of the Rivers,” AJSL, vol. 35 (1919), pp. 161-95.

—. “Notes on Assyrian Lexicography,” RA, vol. 16 (1919), pp. 173-94.

—. “The Goddess of Life and Wisdom,” AJSL, vol. 36 (1919-20), pp. 258-94.

—. “Gilgamesh and Engidu,” JAOS, vol. 40 (1920), pp. 307-35.

Albright, William Foxwell, and Dumont, P. E. “A Parallel Between Indian and Babylonian Sacrificial Ritual,” JAOS, vol. 54 (1934), pp. 107-28.

Alexander, Hartley Burr. North American Mythology. MAR, vol. 10 (1916).

—. Latin American Mythology. MAR, vol. 11 (1920).

Alföldi, Andreas. “Smith as a Title of Dignity” (Hungarian), Magyar Nyelv, vol. 28 (1932), pp. 205-20.

Allen, Richard Hinkley. Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning. New York, 1963 (1st ed. 1899, under the title Star Names and Their Meanings).

“Altorientalische Texte zum Alten Testament.“ In Verbindung mit Erich Ebeling, Hermann Ranke, Nikolaus Rhodokanakis herausgegeben von Hugo Gressmann, 2nd ed. Berlin-Leipzig, 1926.

Amiet, Pierre. La Glyptique Mesopotamienne Archaique. Paris, 1961.

Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, ed. (2nd ed. corrected and enlarged). Princeton, 1955.

Anderson, Andrew Runni. Alexander’s Gate, Gog and Magog, and the Inclosed Nations.

Mediaeval Academy of American Publ. 12. Cambridge, Mass., 1932.

Anderson, R. B. See Edda.

Anklesaria, B. T. Zand-Akâsîh: Iranian or Greater Bundahishn. Transliteration and translation in English. Bombay, 1956.

Apollodorus. The Library, and Epitome, Sir James George Frazer, trans. 1954, 1956. 2 vols. First printed 1921, LCL.

Apollonius Rhodius. Argonautica, R. C. Seaton, trans. 1955. First printed 1921, LCL.

Aratos. Phaenomena, G. R. Mair, trans. 1955. First printed 1921, LCL.

—. Sternbilder und Wetterzeichen. Übersetzt und eingeleitet von Albert Schott, mit Anmerkungen von Robert Böker. München, 1958.

—. See also Maass.

Aristotle. Aristotelis Opera edidit Academia Regia Borussica. Aristoteles Graece ex Recognitione Immanuelis Bekkeri. Darmstadt, 1960. 2 vols. 1st ed. Berlin, 1831.

—. Metaphysics. A revised text with introduction and commentary by W. D. Ross. Oxford, 1953. 2 vols. 1st ed. 1924.

—. Meteorologica, H. D. P. Lee, trans. 1962, LCL.

The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, I. J. Gelb, T. Jacobsen, B. Landsberger, and A. L. Opppenheim, eds. Chicago, 1964-.

Atharva Veda Sanhita, William Dwight Whitney, trans. Delhi, 1962. 2 vols. Reprint from the Cambridge, Mass. ed. 1905. Harvard Oriental Series 7-8.

—. Hymns of the Atharva Veda, Maurice Bloomfield, trans. Delhi; 1964. Reprint from the Oxford University Press ed. 1897. SBE 42.

Athenaeus. Deipnosophistae, Charles Burton Gulick, trans. 1951-1957. 7 vols. First printed 1927-1941, LCL.

Avenol, Louis. See Wou Tch’eng Ngen.

Baravalle, Hermann von. Die Erscheinungen am Sternenhimmel. Stuttgart, 1962.

Barb, Alfons A. “Der Heilige und die Schlangen,” MAGW, vol. 82 (1953), pp. 1-21.

—. “St. Zacharias the Prophet and Martyr," *Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld *Institutes, vol. 11 (1948), pp. 35-67.

Barthel, Thomas S. “Einige Ordnungsprinzipien im Aztekischen Pantheon: Zur Analyse der Sahagunschen Götterlisten,” Paideuma, vol. 10 (1964), pp. 77-101.

Bartholomae, C. Altiranisches Wörterbuch. Strassburg, 1904.

Bastian, Adolf. Die Heilige Sage der Polynesier. Leipzig, 1881.

Baudissin, W. Graf. Adonis und Esmun. Leipzig, 1911.

Baumann, Hermann. *Das Doppelte Geschlecht: Ethnologisthe Studien zur Bisexualität in Ritus *und Mythos. Berlin, 1955.

Baumgartner, W. “Untersuchungen zu den akkadischen Bauausdrücken,” ZA, vol. 36 (1925).

Beckwith, Marta. Hawaiian Mythology. New Haven; London, 1940.

—. The Kumulipo: A Hawaiian Creation Chant. Translated and edited with a commentary. Chicago, 1951.

Benveniste, E. “La Légende de Kombabos,” in Mélanges Syriens offerts à R. Dussaud (1939), pp. 249-58.

Berger, E. H. Mythische Kosmographie der Griechen. Leipzig, 1904. Supplementary volume to Roscher’s Lexikon.

Bernhardi, Anna. “Vier Könige: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Spiele,” BA, vol. 19 (1936), pp. 148-80.

Bertholet, Alfred. “Der Schutzengel Persiens,” Festschrift Pavry (1933), pp. 34-40.

Best, Elsdon. The Astronomical Knowledge of the Maori. Wellington, 1955. Dominion Museum Monograph 3. Reprint from the 1922 ed.

Bezold, Carl. Babylonisch-Assyrisches Glossar. Heidelberg, 1926.

—. “Zenit- und Aequatorialgestirne am babylonischen Fixsternhimmel,” mit astronomischen Beiträgen von August Kopff und Zusätzen von Franz Boll. SHAW, vol. 11 (1913).

Bhagavata Purana: The Srimad-Bhagavatam of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa, J. M. Sanyal, trans. (English), 2nd cd. Calcutta, n.d. Preface, 1952.

Al-Biruni. The Chronology of Ancient Nations, Edward C. Sachau, trans. London, 1879.

—. Alberuni’s India, Edward C. Sachau, trans. Delhi, 1964. 2 vols. Reprint from London ed. 1888.

Boas Anniversary Volume. Anthropological Papers Written in Honor of Franz Boas. New York, 1906.

Boas, Franz. Indianische Sagen von der Nord-Pacifischen Küste Amerikas. Berlin, 1895.

Boas, George. The Hieroglyphs of Horapollo. New York, 1950. Bollingen Series 28.

Böhl, F. M. T. “Die fünfzig Namen des Marduk,” AfO, vol. 11 (1936), pp. 191-218.

—. “Zum babylonischen Ursprung des Labyrinths,“ Festschrift Deimel (1935), pp. 6-23.

Böker, Robert. See Aratos.

Böllenrücher, Josef. Gebete und Hymnen an Nergal. Leipziger Semitistische Studien 1.6 (1904).

Bömer, Franz. “Der sogenannte Lapis Manalis,” ARW, vol. 33 (1936), pp.270-81.

Boll, Franz. *Sphaera: Neue Griechische Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der *Sternbilder. Leipzig, 1903.

—. *Aus der Offenbarung Johannis: Hellenistische Studien zum Weltbild der *Apokalypse. Leipzig-Berlin, 1914. Stoicheia 1.

—. “Antike Beobachtungen farbiger Sterne,” mit einem Beitrage von Carl Bezold. ABAW 30.1 (1916).

Bouché-Leclerq, A. L’Astrologie Grecque. Paris, 1899. Reprint Brussels, 1963.

Breasted, J. H. Development of Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt. New York, 1959. 1st ed. 1912.

Brennand, W. Hindu Astronomy. London, 1896.

The Brihadāranyaka Upanishad. With the commentary of Shankaracarya. Swāmi Mādhavānanda, trans. 4th ed. Calcutta, 1965.

The Brihad-Devata. Attributed to Saunaka. A. A. Macdonell, ed. and trans. Delhi, 1965. Reprint of the 1904 edition, Harvard Oriental Series 5-6.

Brodeur, Arthur Gilchrist. See Edda.

Bromwich, Rachel. Trioedd Ynys Prydein: The Welsh Triads. Edited and with an introduction, translation, and commentary. Cardiff, 1961.

Brugsch, Karl Heinrich. Thesaurus Inscriptionum Aegyptiacarum. Altägyptische Inschriften. Graz, 1968. 1st ed. Leipzig, 1883-1891.

—. Die Aegyptologie. Leipzig, 1891.

Brugsch, Karl Heinrich. Religion und Mythologie der alten Aegypter, nach den Denkmälern bearbeitet. Leipzig, 1891.

Buck, Sir Peter. Mangaian Society. Bulletin BPB Mus. 122. Honolulu, 1934.

Budge, Sir E. A. W. The Life and Exploits of Alexander the Great. Translated from several Ethiopic versions. London, 1896.

—. The Book of the Dead. An English translation of the chapters, hymns, etc., of the Theban Recension, 2nd ed., rev. and enlarged, 7th impression. London, 1956.

Buffière, Félix. Les Mythes d’Homère et la Pensée Grecque. Paris, 1956.

Bundahishn. See Anklesaria.

Burgess, E. See Surya Siddhanta.

Burrows, Eric, S.J. “Some Cosmological Patterns in Babylonian Religion,” in The Labyrinth (London-New York, 1935), pp. 45-70.

—. “The Constellation of the Wagon and Recent Archeology,” in *Festschrift *Deimel (1935), pp. 34-40.

Casanova, Paul. “De quelques Légendes astronomiques Arabes, considérées dans leurs rapports avec la Mythologie Egyptienne,” BIFAO, vol. 2 (1902), pp. 1-39.

Censorinus. Censorini De Die Natali Liber, recensuit et emendavit Otto Jahn. Amsterdam, 1964. Reprint of the 1845 ed., Berlin.

Charpentier, Jarl. Kleine Beiträge zur indoiranischen Mythologie. Uppsala, 1911. Uppsala Univ Arsskrift, fil/hist. Vetensk. 2.

Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanitzin, Domingo de San Anton Mun̄on. Memorial Breve acerca de la Fundación de la Ciudad de Culhuacan . . . Aztekischer Text mit deutscher Übersetzung von W. Lehmann und G. Kutscher Stuttgart, 1958. Quellenwerke zur Alten Geschichte Amerikas 7.

Christensen, Arthur. *Le premier Homme et le premier Roi dans l’Histoire légendaire des *Iraniens. Archives d’Etudes Orientales, vol. 14, pt. 1 (1917), pt. 2 (1934).

—. Les Kayanides. Kgl. Danske Vidensk. Selskab. Hist/filol. Medd., vol. 19. Copenhagen, 1932.

Chwolson, D. Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus. St. Petersburg, 1856. 2 vols.

Cicero. De divinatione, William Armistead Falconer, trans. 1964. First printed 1923, LCL.

—. De natura deorum, H. Rackham, trans. 1956. First printed 1933, LCL.

Claudian, Maurice Platnauer, trans. 1956. 2 vols. First printed 1922, LCL.

Cleasby, Richard. An Icelandic-English Dictionary. Revisled, enlarged, and completed by Gudbrand Vigfusson, 2nd ed. with a supplement by W. A. Craigie. Oxford, 1962. Reprint.

Clemens Alexandrinus. Stromata, Bks. I-VI, O. Stählin, ed. 3rd ed. by L. Früchtel. Berlin, 1960.

—. Die Teppiche (Stromateis). Deutscher Text nach der Übersetzung von Franz Overbeck. Basel, 1936.

Collitz, Hermann. “Konig Yima und Saturn,” in Festschrift Pavry (1933), pp.86-108.

Comparetti, Domenico. The Traditional Poetry of the Finns, J. M. Anderton, trans. London-New York-Bombay, 1898.

Cook, A. B. “The European Sky-God,” Folk-Lore, vol. 15 (1904), pp. 264-315.

Cornford, F. M. “The Aparchai and the Eleusinian Mysteries,” Festschrift Ridgeway (1913), pp. 153-66.

—. See also Plato.

Creuzer, Friedrich. Symbolik und Mythologie der Alten Völker, besonders der Griechen, 3rd ed. Leipzig-Darmstadt, 1837-42.

Cutin, S. “Chess and Playing Cards,” AR U.S. National Museum for 1896 (Washington, 1898), pp. 667-842.

Cumont, Franz. After Life in Roman Paganism. New York, 1959.

—. “Adonis et Sirius,” Extrait des Mélanges Glotz, vol. 1 (1932), pp. 257-64.

Curwen, E. Cecil. “Querns,” Antiquity, vol. 11 (1937), pp. 135-51.

Dähnhardt, Oskar. Natursagen. Leipzig-Berlin, 1907-12. 4 vols.

Dahse, Johannes. “Ein zweites Goldland Salomos: Vorstudien zur Ge schichte Westafrikas,” ZfE, vol. 43 (1911), pp. 1-79.

Daressy, Georges. “L’Égypte Céleste,” BIFAO, vol. 12 (1916), pp. 1-34.

Deimel, Anton. *Pantheon Babylonicum: nomina deorum e textibus cuneiformibus excerpta et *ordine alph. ordinata. Rome, 1914.

Delitzsch, Friedrich. Assyrisches Handwörterbuch. Leipzig-Baltimore-London, 1896.

Deonna, Waldemar. Un divertissement de la table “à cloche-pied.” Brussels, 1959. Collection Latomus 40.

Deonna, Waldemar, and Renard, M. *Croyances et Superstitions de la Table dans la Rome *antique. Brussels, 1961. Collection Latomus 46.

Diakonoff, I. M. “Review article on the GE translations of F. M. T. Böhl and P. L. Matous,” Bibliotheca Orientalis, vol. 18 (1961), pp. 61-67.

Diels, Hermann. “Das Aphlaston der antiken Schiffe,” *Zeitschrift der Vereins für Volkskunde in *Berlin (1915), pp. 61-80.

—. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (Griechisch und Deutsch), 6th ed. Herausgegeben von Walther Kranz. Berlin, 1951. 3 vols.

—. See also Doxographi Graeci.

Dieterich, Albrecht. Nekyia: Beiträge zur Erklärung der neuentdeckten Petrusapokalypse. Leipzig, 1893.

—. Eine Mithrasliturgie. Leipzig-Berlin, 1923.

Dieterlen, Germaine. “The Mande Creation Story,” Africa, vol. 27 (1957), pp. 124-38.

—. See also Griaule, Marcel.

Dittrich, Ernst. “Gibt es astronomische Fixpunkte in der älteren babylonischen Chronologie?” OLZ, vol. 15 (1912), cols. 104-07.

Dixon, Roland B. Oceanic Mythology. MAR, vol. 9 (1916).

Dowson, John. *A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and Reli gion, Geography, History *and Literature, 8th ed. London, 1953.

Doxographi Graeci Collegit recensuit prolegomenis indicibusque instruxit H. Diels, 2nd ed. Berlin, 1929.

Dreyer, J. L. E. A History of Astronomy from Thales to Kepler (formerly titled *History of the *Planetary Systems from Thales to Kepler). Revised with a foreword by W. H. Stahl. New York, 1953.

Duemichen, J. “Die Bauurkunden der Tempelanlage von Edfu,” *Zeitschrift für Aegyptische *Sprache und Altertumskunde, vol. 9 (1871), pp. 25-32.

Dumézil, Georges. Le Festin d’Immortalitté: Étude de Mythologie Comparée Indo-Européenne. Paris, 1924. Annales du Musée Guimet. Bibliothque d’Études, vol. 34.

—. La Saga de Hadingus (Saxo Grammaticus 1, 5-8). Du Mythe au Roman. Paris, 1953. Bibl. École Hautes Etudes, Section Sciences Relig., vol. 66.

Dupuis, Charles. Origine de tous les Cultes et toutes les Religions. Paris, 1795.

Ebeling, Erich. Tod und Leben nach den Vorstellungen der Babylonier. Berlin-Leipzig, 1931.

Edda. Eddalieder, Finnur Jónsson, ed. Halle, 1888-90. Altnordische Textbibliothek 2-3.

—. Die Lieder der sogenannten Älteren Edda, nebst einem Anhang: Die mythischen und heroischen Erzählungen der Snorre Edda. Über setzt und erläutert von Hugo Gering. Leipzig-Vienna, n.d. Preface, 1892.

—. Nach der Übersetzung von Karl Simrock neu bearbeitet von Hans Kuhn. Leipzig: Reclam, n.d.

—. The Prose Edda by Snorri Sturluson. Translated from the Icelandic with an introduction by Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur. New York-London, 1929.

—. Übertragen von Felix Genzmer. Thule, vol. 1 (1928).

—. The Younger Edda, also called Snorre’s Edda, or the Prose Edda. An English version with introduction and notes by Rasmus B. Anderson. Chicago-London, 1880.

—. Die Jüngere Edda. Übertragen von Gustav Neckel und Felix Niedner. Thule, vol. 20 (1942).

Edzard, D. O. “Die Mythologie der Sumerer und Akkader,” in Wörterbuch der Mythologie, vol. 1, pp. 19-139.

Eisenmenger, J. A. Entdecktes Judenthum. Königsberg, 1711. 2 vols.

Eisler, Robert. Weltenmantel und Himmelszelt. München, 1910.

—. Orpheus the Fisher. London, 1921.

—. Orphisch-Dionysische Mysterien-Gedanken in der christlichen Antike. Leipzig-Berlin, 1925. Vortrage Bibliothek Warburg, vol. 2.

—. The Royal Art of Astrology. London, 1946.

Elwin, Verrier. The Agaria. Oxford, 1941.

Emerson, Nathaniel B. Unwritten Literature of Hawaii. BAE Bulletin 38. Washington, 1909.

Emory, Kenneth P. Tuamotuan Religious Structures and Ceremonies. Bulletin BPB Mus. 191. Honolulu, 1947.

Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh- New York, 1955. 13 vols. 1st impression 1908.

Eratosthenes. Catasterismorum Reliquiae, C. Robert, ed. Berlin, 1878. Reprint 1963.

Erman-Grapow. See Wörterbuch der Aegyptischen Sprache. Essays and Studies presented to William Ridgeway. Cambridge University Press, 1913.

Falkenstein, A. “Die Anunna in der sumerischen Überlieferung,” Festschrift Landsberger (1965), pp. 127-40.

Falkenstein, A., and Soden, W. von. Sumerische und Akkadische Hymnen und Gebete. Zurich, 1953.

Fausboll, V. Indian Mythology According to the Mahabharata. London, 1902.

Feng-Shen-Yen-I. Die Metamorphosen der Götter. Historisch-mythologischer Roman aus der Chinesischen. Übersetzung der Kapitel 1-46 von Wilhelm Grube. Durch eine Inhaltsangabe der Kapitel 47-100 erganzt, eingeleitet und herausgegeben von Herbert Mueller. Leiden, 1912.

Festschrift Boas. See Boas Anniversary Volume.

—. Deimel. See Miscellanea Orientalia.

—. Georg Jacob zum 70. Geburtstag, 26. Mai 1932. T. Menzel, ed. Leipzig, 1932.

—. Landsberger. See Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger.

—. Pavry. See Oriental Studies.

—. Popper. See Semitic and Oriental Studies.

—. Ridgeway. See Essays and Studies.

—. Publication d’Hommage offerte au P. W. Schmidt. W. Koppers, ed. Vienna, 1928.

—. Westermann. See Afrikanistische Studien.

Festugière, A. J. See Proclus.

Festus. Sexti Pompei Festi De verborum significatu quae supersunt cum Pauli Epitome, W. M. Lindsay, ed. Hildesheim, 1965. Reprint from Leipzig ed. 1913. BT.

Feuchtwang, D. “Das Wasseropfer und die damit verbundenen Zeremonien,” Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums, vol. 54 (1910), pp. 535-52, 7 I 3-28; vol. 55 (1911), pp. 43-63.

Filliozat, Jean. “L’lnde et les Échanges scientifiques dans l’Antiquité,” *Cahiers d’Histoire *Mondiale, vol. 1 (1953), pp. 353-67.

Firdausi. The Shahnama of Firdausi, Arthur George Warner and Ed ward Warner, trans. London, 1905-09. Vols. 1-4.

—. Das Königsbuch, Deutsch von H. Kanus-Credé. Lieferung 1, Buch 1-5. Glückstadt, 1967.

Florenz, Karl. Der historischen Quellen der Shinto-Religion. Göttingen-Leipzig, 1919. Quellen der Religionsgeschichte.

Forbes, R. J. Studies in Ancient Technology, vol. 3. Leiden, 1955.

Fornander, Abraham. An Account of the Polynesian Race, its Origin and Migrations, vol. 1. London, 1878.

—. Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore. With translations edited and illustrated with notes by Thomas G. Thrum. Mem. BPB Mus. 4-6. Honolulu, 1916-20.

Frankfort, Henry. *Cylinder Seals: A Documentary Essay on the Art and Religion of the Ancient *Near East. London, 1939.

Frazer, Sir James George. Pausanias’ Description of Greece. Translated with a commentary. London. 6 vols.

—. The Dying God (= The Golden Bough, Part 3), 3rd ed. London, 1963.

—. Folk-Lore in the Old Testament. London, 1918. 3 vols.

—. Myths of the Origin of Fire. London, 1930.

—. See also Apollodorus.

Friedrich, J. “Die hethitischen Bruchstücke des Gilgameš-Epos,” ZA, vol. 39 (1929-30), pp. 1-82.

Frobenius, Leo. Das Zeitalter des Sonnengottes. Berlin, 1904.

—. “Das Archiv für Folkloristik,” Paideuma, vol. 1 (1938-40), pp. 1-18.

—. The Childhood of Man. New York, 1960.

Gadd, C. J. “Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet XII” RA, vol. 30 (1933), pp. 129-43.

Ganay, Solange de. See Zahan.

Gardiner, Sir Allan. Egyptian Grammar, 3rd ed. Oxford-London, 1957.

Geminos. Gemini Elementa Astronomiae. Ad codicum fidem recensuit Germanice interpretatione et commentariis instruxit Carolus Manitius. Leipzig, 1898. BT.

Genzmer, Felix. See Edda.

Gering, Hugo. Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, nach dem Todes des Verf. hrsg. von B. Sijmons. Halle, 1927. Germanische Handbibliothek 7.III.1.

—. See also Edda.

Gervasius von Tilbury. Otia Imperialia. In einer Auswahl neu heraus-gegeben und mit Anmerkungen begleitet von Felix Liebrecht. Hannover, 1856.

Gibson, G. E. “The Vedic Nakshatras and the Zodiac,” Festschrift Popper (1951), pp. 149-65.

Gifford, E. W. Tongan Myths and Tales. Bulletin BPB Mus. 8. Honolulu, 1924.

Das Gilgamesch-Epos. Neu übersetzt von Arthur Ungnad und gemein-verständlich erklärt von Hugo Gressmann. Göttingen, 1911.

Das Gilgamesch Epos. Eingeführt, rhythmisch übertragen und mit Anmerkungen versehen von Hartmut Schmökel. Stuttgart, 1966.

Das Gilgamesch-Epos. Neu übersetzt und mit Anmerkungen versehen von Albert Schott. Durchgesehen und ergänzt von Wolfram von Sodern. Stuttgart, 1958.

The Epic of Gilgamesh. An English Version with an introduction by N. K. Sandars. Harmondsworth, 1966. 1st ed. 1960.

Gilgamesh et sa Légende. Études recueillies par Paul Garelli á l’occasion de la VIIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale Paris 1958, in Cahiers du Groupe Francois-Thureau-Dangin, vol. 1. Paris, 1960.

Gilgamesh. See also Heidel, A.; Kramer, S. N.; Speiser, E. A.

Gill, W. W. Myths and Songs from the South Pacific. London, 1876.

Ginsberg, H. C. (trans.) “Ugaritic Myths, Epics and Legends,” ANET, pp. 129-55.

Ginzberg, Louis. The Legends of the Jews. Translated from the German ms. by Henrietta Szold. Philadelphia, 1954. 7 vols.

Gladwin, Harold S. Men Out of Asia. New York, 1947.

Gossmann, P. F. Planetarium Babylonicum (= Deimel, Sum. Lex. 4.2). Rome, 1910.

—. Das Era-Epos. Würzburg, 1956.

Götze, Albrecht. “Akkadian d/tamtum,” Festschrift Deimel (1935), pp. 185-91.

Gollancz, I. Hamlet in Iceland. London, 1898. Northern Library, vol. 3.

Gordon, Cyrus H. Ugaritic Literature. Rome, 1949.

Granet, Marcel. Danses et Légendes de la Chine Ancienne. Paris, 1959. 1st ed. 1926. Annales du Musée Guimet. Bibliotheque d’Études 64.

—. Chinese Civilization, K. E. Innes and M. R. Brailsford, trans. New York, 1961.

Grassmann, Hermann. Wörterbuch zum Rig-Veda, 3rd ed. Wiesbaden, 1955.

Grégoire, Henri, Goossens, R. and Matthieu, M. Asklepios, Apollon Smintheus et Rudra. Brussels, 1949. Mém. Acad. R. de Belgique. Classe des Lettres 45.1.

Grey, Sir George. Polynesian Mythology, Christchurch-London, 1956. 1st Eng. ed. 1855.

Griaule, Marcel. “Le Rôle du Silure Clarias Senegalensis dans la Procréation au Soudan Français,” Festschrift Westermann (1955), pp. 299- 311.

—. Conversations with Ogotemmêli: An Introduction to Dogon Religious Ideas. With an introduction by Germaine Dieterlen. Oxford, 1965 (= *Dieu d’Eau: Entretiens avec *Ogotemmeli. Paris, 1948).

—. “Symbolisme des Tambours Soudanais,” *Mélanges historiques offerts à *Paul-Marie Masson, vol. 1 1955), pp. 79-86.

Griaule, Marcel, and Dieterlen, Germaine. Signes Graphiques Soudanais. Paris, 1951. Actualités Scientifiques et Industrielles 1158.

Grimm, Jacob. Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache, 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1853.

—. Deutsche Mythologie. Tubingen, 1953. Reprint of the 4th ed. 1876. 1st ed. 1835.

—. Reinhard Fuchs. Berlin, 1854.

—. Teutonic Mythology. Translated from the 4th ed. with notes and appendix by J. S. Stallybrass. London, 1883. Reprint 1966.

Grimm, Wilhelm. Die Deutsche Heldensage. Unter Hinzufügung der Nachträge von Karl Müllenhoff und Oskar Jänicke. Darmstadt, 1957. Reprint from 3rd ed. 1889.

Gruenwedel, Albert. Altbuddhistiscbe Kultstätten in Chinesisch Turkestan. Berlin, 1912.

Gruppe, O. Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte. München, 1906. Handbuch der Klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, vol. 5, Abt. 2, pts. 1-2.

Guérin, J. M. G. Astronomie Indienne. Paris, 1847.

Gundel, Wilhelm. De Stellarum Appellatione et Religione Romana. Giessen, 1907. Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 2.

—. Dekane und Dekansternbilder. Glückstadt, 1936. Stud. Bibl. Warburg 19.

—. Neue Astrologische Texte des Hermes Trismegistos, ABAW phil/hist. Kl. N. F. 12. München, 1936.

Guthrie, W. K. C. Orpheus and Greek Religion, 2nd ed. London, 1952.

Haavio, Martti. Vainamoinen, Eternal Sage. FFC, vol. 144 (1952).

—. Der Etanamythos in Finnland. FFC, vol. 154 (1955).

Hagar, Stansbury. The Peruvian Asterisms and Their Relation to the Ritual. 14. Internationaler Amerikanisten-Kongress, 1904 (Stuttgart, 1906), pp. 593-602.

—. “Cherokee Star-Lore,” Festschrift Boas (1906), pp. 354-66.

Hahn, J. G. von. Griechische und Albanesische Märchen, 2nd ed. München-Berlin, 1918. 2 vols.

—. Sagwissenschaftliche Studien. Jena, 1876.

Hako, M. Das Wiesel in der europäischen Volksülberlieferung. FFC, vol. 167 (1956).

Hamel, J. G. van. “The Game of the Gods,” Arkiv for Nördisk Filologi, vol. 50 (1934), pp. 218-42.

Harris, J. Rendel. Boanerges. Cambridge, 1913.

Harrison, Jane Ellen. Themis: A Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religions. New York, 1962. 1st ed. 1912.

Hartmann, R. “Ergeneqon,” Festschrift Georg Jacob (1932), pp. 68-79.

Hartner, Willy. “The Pseudoplanetary Nodes of the Moon’s Orbit in Hindu and Islamic Iconographies,” Ars Islamica, vol. 5 (1938), pt. 1. Reprinted in Willy Hartner, Oriens-Occidens (1968), pp. 349-404.

—. Le Probleme de la Planète Kaïd. Paris, 1955. Conférences du Palais de la Découverte, sér. D, no. 36. Reprinted in Oriens-Occidens, pp. 268-86.

—. “Zur astrologischen Symbolik des ‘Wade Cup’,” Festschrift Kühnel (1959), pp. 234-43. Reprinted in Oriens-Occidens, pp. 405-14.

—. “The Earliest History of the Constellations in the Near East, and the Motif of the Lion-Bull Combat,” HNES, vol. 24 (1965), nos. 1, 2. Reprinted in Oriens-Occidens, pp. 227-59.

—. *Oriens-Occidens: Ausgewahlte Schriften zur Wissenschaftsund *Kulturgeschichte. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag. Hildesheim, 1968. Collectanea 3.

Harva, Uno. See Holmberg.

Heidel, Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago, 1963. 1st ed. 1946.

—. The Babylonian Genesis. Chicago, 1963. 1st ed. 1942.

Heine-Geldern, Robert von. “Weltbild und Bauform in Südostasien,” *Wiener Beiträge zur Kunst- *und Kulturgeschichte Asiens, vol. 4 (1930), pp. 28-78.

Heinzel, Richard. Über das Gedicht vom König Orendel. Vienna, 1892. SOAW, phil-hist. Kl. 126.1.

Held, G. J. The Mahabharata. London, 1935.

Henry, Teuira. Ancient Tahiti: Based on material recorded by J. M. Orsmond. Bulletin BPB Mus. 48. Honolulu, 1928.

Herodotus, A. D. Godley, trans. 1956-57. 4 vols. First printed 1920-25, LCL.

Herrmann, Paul. Die Heldensagen des Saxo Grarmnaticus, pt. 2. Erläuterungen zu den ersten neun Büchern. Leipzig, 1922.

—. Deutsche Mythologie. Leipzig, 1898.

Herzfeld, Ernst. Zoroaster and His World. Princeton, 1947.

Hesiod, Hugh G. Evelyn-White, trans. 1964. First printed 1914, LCL.

Higgins, Godfrey. *Anacalypsis: An attempt to draw aside the Veil of the Saitic Isis, or an Inquiry *into the Origins of Languages, Nations and Religions. New York, 1927. Reprint.

Hinke, W. J. A New Boundary Stone of Nebuchadnezzar I from Nippur. Philadelphia, 1907. Babyl. Exped. U. of Pennsylvania, ser. D, no. 4.

Hinze, Oscar Marcel. “Studien zum Verständnis der archaischen Astronomie,” Symbolon, Jahrbuch fü**r Symbolforschung, vol. 5 (1966), pp. 162-219.

Hofler, Otto. “Cangrande von Verona und das Hundesymbol der Langobarden,” in *Brauch und *Sitte, Festschrift Eugen Fehrle (1940), pp. 101-37.

Holma, Harri. Die Namen der Körperteile im Assyrisch-Babylonischen. Helsinki, 1911. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. B.7.1.

Holmberg, Uno. Der Baum des Lebens. Helsinki, 1922. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. B.16.3.

—. “Finno-Ugric and Siberian Mythology,” MAR, vol. 4 (1927).

—. Die religiösen Vorstellungen der altaischen Völker. Übers. von E. Kunze. FFC, vol. 125 (1938).

Homer. Homeri Ilias, W. Dindorf and C. Hentze, eds. Leipzig, 1928-30. BT.

—. Homeri Odyssea, W. Dindorf and C. Hentze, eds. Leipzig, 1930. BT.

—. The Iliad, W. H. D. Rouse, trans. New York, 1964 1st ed. Edinburgh, 1938.

—. The Odyssey, W. H. D. Rouse, trans. New York, 1961. 1st ed. Edinburgh, 1937.

Hommel, Fritz. “Das ‘Reis’ des Gilgamis,” OLZ, vol. 12 (1909), pp. 473-77.

—. Die Schwur-Göttin Esch-Ghanna und ihr Kreis. München, 1912 (= Anhang zu S. A. B. Mercer. The Oath in Babylonian and Assyrian Literature).

—. Ethnologie und Geographie des Alten Orients. München, 1926. Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, Abt. 3, pt. 1, vol. 1.

Honko, Lauri. “Finnen,” in Wb. Myth. Stuttgart: Klett. Pt. 6, n.d.; pt. 7, 1965.

Horwitz, Hugo T. “Die Drehbewegung in ihrer Bedeutung für die Entwicklung der materiellen Kultur,” Anthropos, vol. 28 (1933), pp. 721-75; vol. 29 (1934), pp. 99-126.

Hüsing, G. Beiträge zur Kyrossage. Leipzig, 1906.

—. Die einheimischen Quellen zur Geschichte Elams. Leipzig, 1916.

Hyde, Thomas. Veterorum Persarum et Parthorum Religionis Historia, 2nd ed. Oxford, 1760.

Hyginus. Hygini Fabulae, recensuit H. J. Rose. Leiden, 1963. Reprint of 1933 ed.

Ideler, Ludwig. *Historische Untersuchungen über die astronomischen Beobachtungen der *Alten. Berlin, 1806.

—. Untersuchungen uber den Ursprung und die Bedeutung der Sternnamen. Berlin, 1809. (LXXII pp. Einleitung; pp. 1-372: Zakaria Ben Mahmud El-Kazwini Gestirnbeschreibung deutsch, mit Erlauterungen die Sternnamen betreffend; pp. 373ff.: El-Kazwini Gestirnbeschreibung arabisch.)

Jablonski, Paul Ernst. Pantheon Aegyptiorum sive de Diis eorum Commentarius. Frankfürt/Oder, 1750-52. 3 parts.

Jacobi, Hermann G. *Mahabharata: Inhaltsangabe, Index und Konkordanz der Calcuttaer und *Bombayer Ausgaben. Bonn, 1903.

Jacobsen, Thorkild. “Parerga Sumerologica,” JNES, vol. 2 (1943), pp. 117-21.

—. “Sumerian Mythology: A Review Article," JNES, vol. 5 (1946), pp. 128-52.

—. The Sumerian King List. Chicago, 1964. Assyriological Studies II.

Jastrow, Morris (Jr.). “Sun and Saturn,” RA, vol. 7 (1909), pp. 163-78.

Jensen, Peter. Die Kosmologie der Babylonier. Strassburg, 1890.

—. Assyrisch-Babylonische Mythen und Epen. Berlin, 1909. Keilinschriftliehe Bibliothek, vol. 6, pt. I.

Jeremias, Alfred. Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alten Orients, 3rd ed. rev. Leipzig, 1916.

—. Handbuch der Altorientalischen Geisteskultur, 2nd ed. rev. Berlin-Leipzig, 1929.

Jiriczek, Otto L. “Hamlet in Iran,” Zschr. des Vereins für Volkskunde, vol. 10 (1900), pp. 353-64.

Jung, C. G., and Kerényi, K. *Essays on a Science of Mythology: The Myths of the Divine Child *and the Divine Maiden. New York, 1949.

Justi, Ferdinand. Iranisches Namenbuch. Marburg, 1895.

Kalevala: The Land of the Heroes, W. F. Kirby, trans. London, 1956. Everyman’s Library, vols. 259-60. 1st ed. 1907.

Kampers, Franz. Mittelalterliche Sagen vom Paradiese und vom Holze des Kreuzes Christi. Köln, 1897.

—. Alexander der Grosse und die Idee des Weltimperiums in Prophetie und Sage. Freiburg, 1901.

—. Vom Werdegange der abendländischen Kaisermystik. Leipzig Berlin, 1924.

Karsten, G. Maass und Gewicht in alten und neuen Systemen. Berlin, 1871.

Kautzsch, E. (ed.) Die Apokryphen und Pseudoepigraphen des Alten Testaments. Tübingen, 1900. 2 vols.

Keeler, Clyde S. Secrets of the Cuna Earthmother. New York, 1960.

Kees, Hermann. Der Götterglaube im Alten Aegypten, 2nd ed. Berlin, 1956.

—. Der Opfertanz des Aegyptischen Königs. Leipzig, 1912.

Keimer, Louis. Interprétation de plusieurs passages d’Horapollon. Cairo, 1947. Supplement vol. 5 of Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte.

Keith, A. Berriedale. Indian Mythology. MAR, vol. 6 (1917).

Kennedy, E. S. “The Sasanian Astronomical Handbook Zîj-i Shâh, and the Astrological Doctrine of ‘Transit’ (Mamarr),” JAOS, vol. 78 (1958), pp. 246-62.

Kepler, Johannes. Opera Omnia, C. Frisch, ed. Frankfurt-Erlangen, vol. 2 (1859); vol. 4 (1863).

—. “De Trigono Igneo” (= chapters 2-11 of De Stella Nova in Pede Serpentarii [Prague, 1606]), in Gesammelte Werke, Max Caspar, ed. München, 1938. Vol. 1, pp. 165-208.

—. Mysterium Cosmographicum. Editio altera, Franz Hammer, ed. München, 1963. Gesammelte Werke, vol. 8.

Kerényi, Karl. “Zum Urkind-Mythologem,” Paideuma, vol. 1 (1938- 40), pp. 241-78.

Kern, Otto. See Orphicorum Fragmenta.

Keynes, Lord John Maynard. “Newton the Man,” in The Royal Society. Newton Tercentenary Celebrations, 15-19 July 1946 (Cambridge, 1947), pp. 27-34.

Kircher, Athanasius, S.J. Oedipus Aegyptiacus. Rome, 1653.

—. Mundus Subterraneus. Amsterdam, 1665.

Kirfel, Willibald. Die Kosmographie der Inder nach den Quellen dargestellt. Bonn-Leipzig, 1920.

Kleomedes. Die Kreisbewegung der Gestirne, A. Czwalina, trans. and commentator. Leipzig, 1927. Ostwalds Klassiker der Naturwissenschaften, vol. 220.

Klibansky, Raymond, Panofsky, E., and Saxl, F. Saturn and Melancholy. London, 1964.

Knapp, Martin. Antiskia: Ein Beitrag zum Wissen um die Präzession im Altertum. Basel, 1927.

—. Pentagramma Veneris. Basel, 1934.

Kramer, Augustin. Die Samoa-Inseln. Stuttgart, 1902. 2 vols.

Kramer, Samuel Noah. Gilgamesh and the Huluppu-Tree. Chicago, 1938. Assyriological Studies 10.

—. Sumerian Mythology. Philadelphia, 1944.

—. “Dilmun, the Land of the Living,” BASOR, vol. 96 (1944), pp. 18-28.

—. “The Epic of Gilgamesh and Its Sumerian Sources,” JAOS, vol. 64 (1944), pp. 7-23.

—. “Gilgamesh and the Land of the Living,” JCS, vol. 1 (1947), pp. 3-46.

—. Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta. Philadelphia, 1952. U. of Pennsylvania Mus. Mono.

—. From the Tablets of Sumer. Indian Hills, Colorado, 1956.

—. The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character. Chicago, 1963.

—. (trans.) “Sumerian Myths and Epic Tales,” ANET, pp. 37-59.

Krappe, Alexander H. “Apollon Smintheus and the Teutonic Mysing,” ARW, vol. 33 (1936), pp. 40-56.

Krause, Ernst. Tuisko-Land. Glogau, 1891.

Krickeberg, Walter. Indianermärchen aus Nordamerika. Jena, 1924.

—. Märchen der Azteken una Inkaperuaner, Maya und Muisca. Jena, 1928.

—. “Mexikanisch-peruanische Parallelen,” Festschrift P. W. Schmidt (1928), pp. 378-93.

—. “Der mittelamerikanische Ballspielplatz und seine religiöse Symbolik,” Paideuma, vol. 3 (1944-49), pp. 118-90.

Kritzinger, Hans H. Der Stern der Weisen: Astronomisch-kritische Studie. Gutersloh, 1911.

Krohn, Kaarle. “Lappische Beiträge zur germanischen Mythologie,” FUF, vol. 6 (1906), pp. 155-80.

Krohn, Kaarle. “‘Windgott und Windzauber,” FUF, vol. 7 (1907), pp. 173ff.

—. Magische Ursprungsrunen der Finnen. FFC, vol. 52 (1924).

—. Kalevalastudien 1. Einleitung. FFC, vol. 53 (1924).

—. Kalevalastudien 3. Ilmarinen. FFC, vol. 71 (1927).

—. Kalevalastudien 4. Sampo. FFC, vol. 72 (1927).

—. Kalevalastudien 5. Vainamoinen. FFC, vol. 75 (1928).

—. Kalevalastudien 6. Kullervo. FFC, vol.76 (1928).

Kugler, Franz Xaver, S.J. Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel, Münster i. W., 1907-13.

—. Drittes Erganzungsheft zum I.U.2. Buch, von Johannes Schaumberger. Münster, 1935.

—. *Sibyllinischer Sternkampf und Phaethon in naturgeschichtlicher *Beleuchtung. Münster, 1927.

Kuhn, Adalbert. Die Herabkunft des Feuers und des Göttertranks, 2nd ed. Gütersloh, 1886.

Kunitzsch, Paul. Arabische Sternnamen in Europa. Wiesbaden, 1959.

Labat, Rene. Manuel d’Epigraphie Akkadienne, 4th ed. Paris, 1963.

The Labyrinth: Further Studies in the Relation Between Myth and Ritual in the Ancient World, Samuel Henry Hooke, ed. London-New York, 1935.

Lagercrantz, Sture. “The Milky Way in Africa,” Ethnos (1952), pp. 64-72.

Landsberger, Benno. *Die Fauna des Alten Mesopotamien nach der 14. Tafel der Serie HAR-RA *= HUBULLU. Unter Mitwirkung von J. Krumbiegel, Leipzig, 1934. Abhandlungen d. Sächsischen Akad. d. Wiss. phil-hist. Kl. 42.6.

—. “Einige unbekannt gebliebene oder verkannte Nomina des Akkadischen,” WZKM, vol. 56 (1960), pp. 109-29.

Langdon, Stephen. Semitic Mythology. MAR, vol. 5 (1931).

—. The Legend of Etana and the Eagle, or the Epical Poem “The City They **Hated.” Paris, 1932.

Lauth, Franz Joseph. “Horapollon,” SBAW (1876), pp. 57-115.

—. Zodiaques de Denderah. München, 1865.

Lehmann-Haupt, C. F. Babyloniens Kulturmission einst und jetzt. Leipzig, 1903.

Lehmann-Nitsche, Robert. “Das Sternbild des Kinnbackens in Vorderasien und Sudamerika,” offprint from Zweiter Tagungsbericht der Gesellschaft für Völkerkunde. Leipzig, 1936. 14 pp.

Lessmann, Heinrich. Die Kyrossage in Europa. Programm Stadtische Realschule. Charlottenburg, 1906.

Lewy, Hildegard. “Origin and Significance of the Mâgên Dâwîd,” Archiv Orientalni, vol. 18, pt. 3 (1950), pp. 330-65.

Lewy, Hildegard and Julius. “The Origin of the Week and the Oldest Westasiatic Calendar,” HUCA, vol. 17 (1942-43), pp. 1-152.

—. “The God Nusku,” Orientalia, vol. 17 (1948), pp. 146-59.

Liebrecht, Felix. Zur Volkskunde. Alte und neue Aufsätze. Heilbronn, 1879.

—. See also Gervasius von Tilbury.

Littmann, Enno. “Sternensagen und Astrologisches aus Nordabessinien,” ARW, vol. 11 (1908), pp. 298-319.

Lockyer, Sir J. Norman. The Dawn of Astronomy. Cambridge, Mass., 1964 1st ed. 1894.

Loeb Classical Library, founded by James Loeb. London: Heinemann; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Lommel, Hermann. Die Yäsht’s des Awesta, übersetzt und eingeleitet. Göttingen-Leipzig, 1927. Quellen der Religionsgeschichte.

Liebrecht, Felix. “Kavy Uçan,” in Melanges Linguistiques offerts à C. Bally (Geneva, 1939), pp. 209-14.

Loomis, Roger Sherman (ed.) Arthurian Literature in the Middle Ages. Oxford, 1959.

—. The Grail: From Celtic Myth to a Christian Symbol. Cardiff-New York, 1963.

L’Orange, H. P. Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World. Inst. Sammenlignende Kulturforskning, ser. A.23. Oslo-London-Wiesbaden-Cambridge, Mass., 1953.

Loth, J. Les Mabinogion du Livre Rouge de Hergest. Ed. revue, augmentée. Paris, 1913. 2 vols.

Lucian. “De Dea Syria,” A. M. Hannon, trans., in vol. 4 of Lucian. LCL.

—. “De Saltatione”, “Astrologia,” A. M. Harmon, trans., in vol. 5 of Lucian. LCL.

—. “Saturnalia,” K. Kilburn, trans., in vol. 6 of Lucian. LCL.

Lüders, Heinrich. Das Würfelspiel im Alten Indien. Göttingen, 1907. Abhdl. Ges. Wiss. New Series 9.2.

—. “Die Sage von Rishyashringa,” in Philologica Indica: Ausgewählte Kleine Schriften von Heinrich Lü**ders (1940), pp. 1-42.

—. “Zur Sage von Rishyashringa,” in Philologica Indica, pp. 47-73.

—. Varuna. Aus dem Nachlass herausgegeben von Ludwig Alsdorf. Göttingen, vol. 1, 1951; vol. 2, 1959.

Luedtke, W. “Die Verehrung Tschingis-Chans bei den Ordos-Mongolen. Nach dem Berichte G. M. Potanins aus dem Russischen ubersetzt und erläutert,” ARW, vol. 25 (1917), pp. 83-129.

Ludendorff, Hans. “Zur astronomischen Deutung der Maya-Inschriften,” SPAW, phys.-math. Kl. (1936), pp. 65-88.

Lycophron, A. W. Mair, trans. 1955. First printing 1921, LCL.

Lydus. Joannis Laurentii Lydi Liber de Mensibus, R. Wuensch, ed. Stuttgan, 1967. 1st ed. 1898. BT.

Lynam, Edward. The Carta Marina of Olaus Magnus: Venice 1539 and Rome 1572. Jenkintown, Pa., 1949. Tall Tree Library Publ. 12.

Maass, Alfred. “Sternkunde und Sterndeuterei im Malaiischen Archipel,” Tijdschrift Ind. Taal-, Land-, en Volkenkunde, vol. 64 (1924-25), pp. 1-172, 347-459; vol. 66 (1926), pp. 618-70.

Maass, Ernst. Commentariorum in Aratum Reliquiae. Berlin, 1898. Reprint 1958.

The Mabinogion: A New Translation by Gwyn Jones and Thomas Jones. London, 1949. Everyman’s Library, vol. 97.

Macdonell, Anbur Anthony. A Practical Sanskrit Dictionary. Oxford, 1929.

McGuire, J. D. A Study of the Primitive Methods of Drilling. AR U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1894 (Washington, 1896), pp. 623-756.

Macrobius. Conviviorum Saturnaliorum Septem Libri (Latin and French). Traduction nouvelle par Henri Bornecque (I-III) and François Richard (IV-VII). Paris, n.d. Classiques Garnier.

—. Commentary on the Dream of Scipio. Translated with introduction and notes by William Harris Stahl. New York, 1952. Records of Civilization, Sources and Studies, vol. 48.

The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa. Translated into English prose from the original Sanskrit Text by Pratap Chandra Roy, 2nd ed. Calcutta, n.d. 12. vols.

Makemson, Maud W. The Morning Star Rises: An Account of Polynesian Astronomy. New Haven-London, 1941.

Manilius. *The Five Books of M. Manilius: Containing a System of the Ancient Astronomy and *Astrology. Together with the Philosophy of the Stoicks, done into English Verse with Notes. London, 1697. Republished in 1953 by the National Astrological Library, Washington, D.C.

—. M. Manili Astronomicon, recensuit F. Jacob. Berlin, 1846.

Mannhardt, Wilhelm. Wald- und Feldkulte. Vol. 1: Der Baumkultus der Germanen una ihrer Nachbarstämme (1875); Vol. 2: Antike Waldund Feldkulte aus nordeuropäischer Überlieferung erläutert (1877) Berlin.

Mansikka, V. J. *Über russische Zauberformeln mit Berücksichtigung der Blut- und *Verrenkungssagen. Helsinki, 1909. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. ser. B.1.

Marsham, Johannes. Canon chronicus Aegypticus, Ebraicus, Graecus. London, 1672.

Massignon, Louis, and others. “Les sept dormants d’Ephèse (Ahl-AI-Kahf) en Islam et en Chrétienté. Recueil documentaire et iconographique,” Revue des Études Islamiques, Paris, 1954 (1955), pp. 61-11 2; 1955 (1956), pp. 93-106; 1957, pp. I-II; 1958, pp. 1-10; 1959, pp. 1-8; 1960, pp. 107-13; 1961, pp. 1-18; 1963, pp. 1-5.

Matthews, W. H. *Mazes and Labyrinths: A General Account of Their History and *Developments. New York-Toronto-Bombay, 1922.

Mayer, Maximilian. Die Giganten und Titanen in der antiken Sage und Kunst. Berlin, 1887.

Mayrhofer, Manfred. Kurzgefasstes Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen. Heidelberg, 1956.

Meier, Gerhard. “Ein Kommentar zu einer Selbstprädikation des Marduk aus Assur,” ZA, vol. 47 (1942), pp. 241-46.

Meissner, Bruno. Alexander und Gilgamos. Habilitationsschrift. Leipzig, 1894.

—. Babylonien und Assyrien, vol. 2. Heidelberg, 1925.

—. Beitreige zum Assyrischen Wörterbuch. Chicago, 1932. Assyriological Studies, vol. 1, pt. 1.

Mette, Hans Joachim. Sphairopoiia: Untersuchungen zur Kosmologie des Krates von Pergamon. München, 1936.

Michatz, Paul. Die Götterlisten der Serie An ilu A-nu-um. Doctoral Dissertation. Breslau, 1909.

Miscellanea Orientalia dedicata A. Deimel. An. Or., vol. 12. Rome, 1935

Monod, T. “Le ciel austral et l’orientation (autour d’un article de Louis Massignon),” Bull. Institut Français d’Afrique Noire 25, ser. B (1963), pp.415-26.

Mooney, James. “Myths of the Cherokee,” 19th ARBAE 1897-98 (Washington, 1900), pp. 3-548.

Moritz, L. A. Grain Mills and Flour in Classical Antiquity. Oxford, 1958.

Movers, Franz Karl. Die Phönizier. Aalen, 1967. Reprint of the 1841-56 ed. 3 vols.

Mowinckel, Sigmund. Die Sternnamen im Alten Testament, Offprint from Norsk Teologisk Tidsskrift 29 (1928).

Much, R. “Der germanische Himmelsgott,” in *Abhandlungen zur germanischen Philologie. *Festgabe für R. Heinzel (Halle, 1898), pp. 189- 278.

Müller, J. G. Geschichte der Amerikanischen Urreligionen. Basel, 1855.

Müller, W. Max. Egyptian Mythology. MAR, vol. 12 (1918).

Mus, Paul. Barabudur. Hanoi, 1935.

Musurillo, Herbert, S.J. “The Mediaeval Hymn, Alma Redemptoris,” Classical Journal, vol. 52 (1957), pp. 171-74.

Nauck, August. See Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta.

Neckel. See Edda.

Needham, Joseph. Science and Civilization in China. With the Research Assistance of Wang Lin. Vol. 3: Mathematics and the Sciences of the Heavens and the Earth (1959); vol. 4.1: Physics (1962); vol. 4.2: Mechanical Engineering (1965). Cambridge University Press.

Negelein, Julius von. “Zum kosmologischen System in der ältesten indischen Literatur,” OLZ, vol. 29 (1926), cols. 903-07.

Neugebauer, Otto. The Exact Sciences in Antiquity, 2nd ed. New York, 1962.

Neugebauer, Otto, and Parker, R. A. Egyptian Astronomical Texts. Brown University Bicentennial Publications. Vol. 1: The Early Decans (1960); vol 2: The Ramesside Star Clocks (1964). London.

Nihongi: Chronicles of Japan from the earliest times to A.D. 697. Translated from the original Chinese and Japanese by W. G. Aston. London, 1956. Reprint.

Nöldeke, Theodor. “Sieben Brunnen,” ARW, vol. 7 (1904), pp. 340-44.

Nonnos. Dionysiaca, W. H. D. Rouse, trans. 1955-56. First printing 1940. 3 vols. LCL.

Normann, Friedrich. Mythen der Sterne, Gotha-Stuttgart, 1924.

Numelin, Ragnar. Les Migrations Humaines, traduit par Victor Forbin. Paris, 1939.

Numuzawa, F. K. Die Weltanfänge in der Japanischen Mythologie. Paris-Lucerne, 1946.

Nyberg, H. S. Die Religionen des Alten Iran. Deutsch von H. H. Schaeder. Osnabrück, 1966. Reprint of the 1938 ed.

Oberhuber, Karl. Der numinose Begriff ME im Sumerischen. Innsbruck, 1963. lnnsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft. Sonderheft 17.

O’Curry, Eugene. On the Manners and Customs of the Ancient Irish: A Series of Lectures. Edited with an introduction, appendices, etc., by W. K. Sullivan. London-Edinburgh-Dublin-NewYork, 1873. 3 vols.

Ohlmarks, A. Heimdalls Horn und Odins Auge. Lund-Copenhagen, 1937.

—. Stellt die mythische Bifröst den Regenbogen oder die Milchstrasse dar? Medd. Lunds Astron. Observ. ser. II, no. 110 (1941).

Ohrt, F. The Spark in the Water: An Early Christian Legend — A Finnish Magic Sound. FFC, vol. 65 (1926).

Olcott, William Tyler. Star Lore of All Ages. New York-London, 1911.

Olrik, Axel. The Heroic Legends of Denmark, L. M. Hollander, trans. New York-London, 1919.

—. Ragnarök: Die Sagen vom Weltuntergang. Übers. von W. Ranisch. Berlin-Leipzig, 1922.

Olschki, Leonardo. “The Wise Men of the East in Oriental Traditions,” Festschrift Popper (1951), pp. 375-95.

Onians, R. D. *The Origins of European Thought About the Body, the Mind, the Soul, the World, *Time, and Fate, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 1954.

Oppenheim, A. L. “Akkadian pul(u)h(t)u and melammu,” JAOS, vol. 63 (1943),PP. 31-34.

—. “Mesopotamian Mythology,” Or., vol. 16 (1947), pp. 207-38; vol. 17 (1948), pp. 17-58; vol. 19 (1950), pp. 129-58.

Oriental Studies in Honour of C. R. Pavry. Oxford, 1933.

Orphicorum Fragmenta. Otto Kern, ed. 2nd ed. Berlin, 1963.

Orphei Hymni. W. Quandt, ed. 2nd ed. Berlin, 1962.

Otten, H. Mythen vom Gotte Kumarbi: Neue Fragmente. Berlin, 1950. Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Orientforschung.

Ovid. Fasti, Sir James George Frazer, trans. 1951. LCL.

—. Metamorphoses, Frank Justus Miller, trans. Vol. 1 (1956); vol. 2 (1958). First printing 1916, LCL.

Pallis, S. A. The Babylonian Akitu-Festival. Copenhagen, 1926. K. Danske Videnskab. Sels. Hist/phil. Medd. 12.1.

Paques, Viviana. L’Arbre Cosmique dans la Pensée populaire et dans la Vie quotidienne du Nord-Ouest Africain. Paris, 1964. Université de Paris. Travaux et Memoires de 1’Institut d’Ethnologie 70.

Pascal, Blaise. Oeuvres Completes. Paris, 1963.

—. Pensées, W. F. Trotter, trans. New York, 1941 (Modern Library) .

Pausanias. Description of Greece, W. H. S. Jones, trans. 1954-55. 4 vols. First printing 1918-35, LCL.

Pechuel-Loesche, E. Volkskunde von Loango. Stuttgart, 1907.

Penzer, N. M. *The Ocean of Story, being C. H. Tawney’s Translation of Somadeva’s Katha Sarit *Sagara. Edited with an introduction, explanatory notes and terminal essay by N. M. Penzer. London, 1924.

Petronius. The Satyricon, William Arrowsmith, trans. New York, 1960. New American Library.

Photius. Bibliothèque. Texte établi et traduit par René Henry. Paris, 1959-67 (to be continued).

Pindar, Sir John Sandys, trans. 1957. First printing 1915, LCL.

Pingree, David. “Astronomy and Astrology in India and Iran,” ISIS, vol. 54 (1963), pp. 229-46.

Pischel, R. and Geldner, K. F. Vedische Studien. Stuttgart, 1889-1901. 3 vols.

Plato. Platonis Opera, recognovit brevique adnotatione instruxit Ioannes Burnet. Oxford, 1957-59. 5 vols. First published 1900-07. Oxford Classical Texts.

—. Plato’s Cosmology: The Timaeus of Plato translated with a running commentary, by Francis Macdonald Cornford. New ,York, 1957. The Library of Liberal Arts, vol. 101.

—. The Republic of Plato. Translated with introduction and notes by Francis Macdonald Cornford. New York-London, 1952. 1st ed. 1941.

—. Plato’s Phaedo: The Phaedo of Plato translated with introduction, notes and appendices, by R. S. Bluck. New York, 1955. The Li brary of Liberal Arts, vol. 110.

—. The Works of Plato, selected and edited by Irwin Edman (from the third edition of the Jowett translation). New York, 1956. The Modern Library.

Plutarch. De Iside et Osiride. De defectu oraculorum, Frank Cole Babbitt, trans. 1957. First printing 1936, LCL. Moralia, vol. 5.

—. De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet, Harold Cherniss and William C. Helmbold, trans. 1957. LCL. Moralia, vol. 12.

Pogo, Alexander. “The Astronomical Ceiling Decoration in the Tomb of Senmut (18th Dyn.),” ISIS, vol. 14 (1931), pp. 301-25.

—. “Zum Problem der Identifikation der nördlichen Sternbilder der alten Aegypter,” ISIS, vol. 16 (1931), pp. 102-14.

Pokorny, Julius. “Ein neun-monatiges Jahr im Keltischen,“ OLZ, vol. 21 (1918), cols. 130-33.

Popol Vuh: The Sacred Book of the Ancient Quiché Maya. English version by Delia Goetz and Sylvanus G. Morley from the Spanish translation by Adrián Recinos. London-Edinburgh, 1951.

Potarun, G. M. See Luedtke, W.

Preisendanz, Karl (ed. and trans.). Papyri Graecae Magicae: Die Griechischen Zauberpapyri. Leipzig-Berlin, 1928. 2 vols.

Preller, L. Griechische Mythologie, 5th ed. Bearbeitet von Carl Robert. Berlin-Zürich, 1964.

Proclus. Procli Diadochi in Platonis Timaeum Commentaria, E. Diehl, ed. Leipzig, 1903-06. 3 vols. BT. (To be continued.)

—. Commentaire sur le Timée. Traduction et notes par A. J. Festugière. Paris, 1966-68. 4 vols.

Pseudo-Callisthenes. Historia Alexandri Magni. Vol. 1: Recensio vetusta, W. Kroll, ed. Berlin, 1958. Reprint from the 1926 ed.

Ptolemy. Claudii Ptolemaei opera quae exstant omnia, vols. 1 and 2: Syntaxis Mathematica, J. L. Heiberg, ed. Leipzig, 1898-1903. BT.

—. Ptolemaeus. Handbuch der Astronomie (Almagest). Deutsche Übersetzung und erläuternde Anmerkungen von K. Manitius. Vorwort und Berichtigungen von Otto Neugebauer. Leipzig, 1963. 2 vols. BT.

—. Tetrabiblos, F. E. Robbins, trans. 1956. First prjnting 1940, LCL.

The Pyramid Texts in translation and commentary. Samuel A. B. Mercer, ed. New York-London-Toronto, 1952.4 vols.

Rabuse, Georg. Der kosmische Aufbau der Jenseitsreiche Dantes. Graz-Köln, 1958.

Realencyclopaedie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Pauly’s Realencyclopaedie). Neu bearbeitet und unter Mitwirkung zahlreicher Fachgenossen herausgegeben von Georg Wissowa. Stuttgart, 1893—.

Reallexikon der Assyriologie. Unter Mitwirkung zalreicher Fachgelehrter hrsg. von Erich Ebeling und Bruno Meissner. Vol. 3 (1959ff.) Ernst Weidner. Berlin-Leipzig, 1932—.

Reuter, Otto Sigfrid. Germanische Himmelskunde: Untersuchungen zur Gescbichte des Geistes. München, 1934.

Riemschneider, Margarete. Augengott und Heilige Hochzeit. Leipzig, 1953. (= Riemschneider. Fragen zur vorgeschichtlichen Religion, vol. 1.)

Der Rig-Veda. Aus dem Sanskrit ins Deutsche übersetzt und mit einem laufenden Kommentar versehen von Karl Friedrich Geldner. Cambridge, Mass., 1951. 3 vols. Vol. 4: Namen- und Sachregister . . . von J. Nobel, 1957. Harvard Oriental Series 33-36.

Roeder, Günther. Urkunden zur Religion des Alten Aegypten. Jena, 1915. Religiöse Stimmen der Völker.

—. Altaegyptische Erzählungen und Märchen. Jena, 1927.

Roennow, Karsten. “Zur Erklärung des Pravargya, der Agnicayana und des Sautrāmanī,” *Le *Monde Oriental (1929), pp. 113-73.

Rohde, Erwin. “Zum griechischen Roman,” Rh. Mus., vol. 48 (1893), pp. 110-40.

Rooth, Anna B. *The Raven and the Carcass: An Investigation of a Motif in the Deluge Myth in *Europe, Asia and North America. FFC, vol. 186 (1962).

Roscher, W. H. D. (ed.) Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie. Leipzig, 1884-1937. Reprint Hildesheim, 1965. 10 vols.

Roscher, T. H. “Die Legende vom Tode des Grossen Pan,” Fleckeisens Jahrbücher für Classische Philologie, vol. 38 (1892), pp. 465-77.

—. Omphalos. Leipzig, 1913. Abhdl. Sächs. Ges. Wiss. phil/hist. Kl. 29.9.

—. Der Omphalosgedanke bei verschiedenen Völkern, besonders den semitischen. BVSGW, vol. 70.2 (1918).

Roth, Walter E. An Inquiry into the Animism and Folk-lore of the Guiana Indians. 30th ARBAE 1908-09 (Washington, 1915), pp. 103-386.

Rydberg, Viktor. Teutonic Mythology. Authorized translation from the Swedish by Rasmus B. Anderson. London-Copenhagen-Stockholm-Berlin-New York, 1907.

Sachs, A. (trans.) “Akkadian Rituals,” ANET, pp. 331-45.

Sahagún. Einige Kapitel aus dem Geschichtswerk des Fray Bernardino de Sahagún. Aus dem Aztekischen ubersetzt von Eduard Seler. Stuttgart, 1927.

Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. General History of the Things of New Spain. Florentine Codex. Translated from the Aztec into English with notes and illustrations by Arthur J. O. Anderson and Charles E. Dibble. Santa Fe, New Mexico, 1953. Book *7: The Sun, Moon, and Stars, and the *Binding of the Years. With an appendix consisting of the first five chapters of Book VII from the Memoriales con escolios.

Salonen, Armas. Die Wasserfahrzeuge in Babylonien nach sumerisch-akkadischen Quellen. Helsinki, 1936. Studia Orientalia Societas Orientalis Fennica 8.4.

—. Nautica Babyloniaca: Eine lexikalische und kulturgeschichtliche Untersuchung. Helsinki, 1942. Studia Orientalia Societas Orientalis Fen nica 11.1.

—. Die Landfahrzeuge des Alten Mesopotamien. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. sere. B.72.2 (1951).

Sandars, N. K. See The Epic of Gilgamesh.

Sandman Holmberg, Maj. The God Ptah. Lund, 1946.

Santillana, Giorgio de. *The Origins of Scientific Thought: From Anaximander to Proclus 600 B.C. *to 500 A.D. Chicago-London, 1961.

—. Prologue to Parmenides. Princeton, N.J., 1964 (Lectures in Memory of Louise Taft Semple). Reprinted in G. de Santillana, Reflections on Men and Ideas (1968), pp. 82-119.

—. Reflections on Men and Ideas. Cambridge, Mass., 1968.

—. “The Role of Art in the Scientific Renaissance,” in Critical Problems in the History of Science, Marshall Clagett, ed. Madison, Wis., 1959, pp. 33-65. Reprinted in *Reflections *on Men and Ideas (1968), pp. 137-66.

Santillana, G. de, and Pitts, W. “Philolaos in Limbo or, What hap pened to the Pythagoreans?” ISIS, vol. 42 (1951), pp. 112-20. Reprinted in Reflections on Men and Ideas, pp. 190-201.

Saussure, Léopold de. Les Origines de l’Astronomie Chinoise. Paris, 1930. Reproduction photomécanique posthume d’artic1es parus dans le T’oung Pao.

Saxo Grammaticus. The First Nine Books of the Danish History of Saxo Grammaticus. Translated by Oliver Elton with some considerations by Frederick York Powell. London, 1894. Folk-Lore Society Public. 33.

—. Saxonis Gesta Danorum, primum a C. Knabel et P. Herrmann recensita recognoverunt et ediderunt J. Olrik and H. Raeder. Vol. 1: Textum continens (1931); vol. *2: *Indicem verborum conficiendum curavit Franz Blatt (1957). Copenhagen.

Schaeder, Hans Heinrich. “Der iranische Zeitgott un rsein Mythos,” ZDMG, vol. 95 (1941), pp. 268-99.

Schaumberger. See Kugler.

Scheftelowitz, J. Die Zeit als Schicksalsgottheit in der indischen und iranischen Religion. Stuttgart, 1929.

Scherer, Anton. Gestirnnamen bei den indogermanischen Völkern. Heidelberg, 1953.

Schirren, C. Die Wandersagen der Neuseeländer und aer Mauimythos. Riga 1856.

Schlegel, Gustave. L’Uranographie Chinoise. Leiden, 1875. Reprint Taipei, 1967.

Schmidt, Leopold. “Pelops und die Haselhexe,” Laos, vol. 1 (1951), pp. 67-78.

Schmidt, Pater Wilhelm. Der Ursprung der Gottesidee, vol. 11: Die asiatischen Hirtenvölker. Münster i. W., 1954.

Schmökel, Hartmut. See Das Gilgamesch Epos.

Schneider, Marius. “Pukku und Mikku: Ein Beitrag zum Aufbau und zum System der Zahlenmystik des Gilgamesch-Epos,“ Antaios, vol. 9 (1967), pp. 262-83.

Schott, Albert. “Das Werden der babylonisch-assyrischen Positions-Astronomie und einige seiner Bedingungen,” ZDMG, vol. 88 (1934), pp. 302-37.

—. “Zu meiner Übersetzung des Gilgamesch-Epos,” ZA, vol. 42 (1934), pp. 92-143.

—. See also Aratos; Das Gilgamesch-Epos.

Schröder, Franz Rolf. Altgermanische Kulturprobleme. Berlin, 1929.

—. Skadi und die Götter Skandinaviens. Tübingen, 1941.

Scriptores Rerum Mythicarum Latini Tres Romae Nuper Reperti. Edidit ac scholiis illustravit Georgius Henricus Bode. Hildesheim, 1968. 2 vols. 1st ed. Celle, 1834.

Sède, Gérard de. Les Templiers sont parmi nous. Paris, 1962.

Seler, Eduard. Codex Vaticanus Nr. 3773 (Codex Vaticanus B). Berlin, 1902.

—. Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und Altertumskunde. Graz, 1960-61. 5 vols. Reprint of the 1902-23 ed., Berlin.

—. See also Sahagún.

Semitic and Oriental Studies presented to William Popper. Berkeley, 1951.

Servii Grammatici qui feruntur in Vergilii Carmina Commentarii. Rec. G. Thilo and H. Hagen. Hildesheim, 1961. Reprint of the 1884 ed. Leipzig.

Setälä, E. N. “Kullervo-Hamlet,” FUF, vol. 3 (1903), pp. 61-97; vol. 7 (1907), pp. 188-264; vol. 10 (1910), pp. 44-127.

The Shatapatha-Brāhmana according to the Text of the Mādhyandina School, Julius Eggeling, trans. Delhi, 1963. Reprint from the 1882-1900 ed. 5 vols. SBE 12, 26, 41, 43, 44.

Sicard, Harald von. Ngoma Lungundu: Eine afrikanische Bundeslade. Uppsala, 1952. Studia Ethnographica Upsaliensia 3.

Sieg, Emil. Die Sagenstoffe des Rigveda und die indische Itihāsatradition. Stuttgart, 1902.

Simeon, Remi. Dictionnaire de la Langue Nahuatl. Graz, 1964. Reprint of the 1885 ed.

Simrock, Karl. *Der ungenāhte Rock oder König Orende, wie er den grauen Rock gen Trier *brachte. Gedicht des 12. Jahrhunderts, übersetzt. Stuttgart, 1845.

—. Handbuch der Deutschen Mythologie, 3rd ed. Bonn, 1869.

—. Die Quellen des Shakespeare in Novellen, Märchen und Sagen. Bonn, 1870.

—. See also Edda.

Singer, Charles, Holmyard, E. J., and Hall, A. R. (eds.) A History of Technology, vol. 1. Oxford, 1954.

Smith, Sidney. “b/pukk/qqu and mekku,” RA, vol. 30 (1933), pp. 153-68.

Smith, S. Percy (ed. and trans.) The Lore of the Whare-wānanga. New Plymouth, 1913. Memoirs Polynesian Society 3.

Smith, W,. Robertson. The Religion of the Semites. New York, 1957. Reprint.

Snorri Sturluson. See Edda.

Soden, Wolfram von. “Licht und Finsternis in der sumerischen und babylonisch-assyrischen Religion,” Studium Generale, vol. 13 (1960), pp.647-53.

—. “Neue Bruchstucke zur sechsten und siebenten Tafel des Weltschöpfungsepos Enuma elish,” ZA, vol. 47 (1942), pp. 1-16.

—. “Zu einigen altbabylonischen Dichtungen,” OR., vol. 26 (1957), pp. 306-20.

Sörensen, S. An Index to the Names in the Mahabharata. With short explanations and a concordance to the Bombay and Calcutta editions and P. C. Roy’s translation. Delhi, 1963. 1st ed. London, 1904.

Speck, Frank G., and Moses, Jesse. The Celestial Bear Comes Down to Earth: The Bear Sacrifice Ceremony of the Munsee-Mohican in Canada, as related by Nekatcit. Reading, Pennsylvania, 1945. Reading Public Museum and Art Gallery, Scientific Public. 7.

Speiser, E. A. (trans.) “Akkadian Myths and Epics,” ANET (1966), pp. 60-119.

Stegemann, Viktor. Astrologie und Universalgeschickte: Studien und Interpretationen zu den Dionysiaka des Nonnos von Panopolis. Stoicheia, vol. 9 (1930).

Stein, Sir Aurel. *Innermost Asia: Detailed Report of Explorations in Central Asia, Kan-Su and *Eastern Iran, vol. 3. Oxford, 1928.

Stimson, J. Frank. Tuamotuan Religion. Bulletin BPB Mus. 103. Honolulu, 1933.

—. The Cult of Kiho-Tumu. Bulletin BPB Mus. 111. Honolulu, 1934.

—. The Legends of Maui and Tahaki. Bulletin BPB Mus. 127. Honolulu, 1934.

Stokes, Whitley. “The Prose Tales in the Rennes Dindsenchas,” Revue Celtique, vol. 15 (1894), pp. 272-336, 418-84; vol. 16 (1895), pp. 31-83, 135-67, 269-307.

Storck, John, and Teague, W. D. Flour for Man’s Bread: A History of Milling. Minneapolis-London, 1952.

Ström, Ake V. “Indogermanisches in der Volüspa,” Numen, vol. 14 (1967), pp.167-208.

Stucken, Eduard. Astralmythen. Leipzig, 1896-1907.

—. Der Ursprung des Alphabets und die Mondstationen. Leipzig, 1913.

Studies in honor of Benno Landsberger on his 75th Birthday. Chicago, 1965. Assyriological Studies 16.

Stutterheim, W. Râma-Legenden una Râma-Reliefs in Indonesien. München, 1925.

Sūrya Siddhānta. Translation of the Sūrya Siddhānta with notes and an appendix by Rev. Ebenezer Burgess. Reprinted from the 1860 ed., P. Gangooly, ed. With an introduction by P. Sengupta. U. of Calcutta, 1935.

Taittiriya Sanhita: The Veda of the Black Yajus School, entitled Taittiriya Sanhita. Translated from the original Sanskrit prose and verse by Arthur Berriedale Keith. Delhi, 1967. Reprinted from the 1914 ed., Harvard Oriental Series 18-19.

Tallqvist, Knut. Sumerisch-akkadische Namen der Totenwelt. Helsinki, 1934. Studia Orientalia Soc. Orient. Fenn. 5.4.

—. Akkadische Götterepitheta. Helsinki, 1938. Studia Orientalia Soc. Orient. Fenn. 7.

Taqizadeh, S. H. Old Iranian Calendars. London, 1938.

Taylor, A. D. A Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Oxford, 1928.

Testa, Monsignor Domenico. Il Zodiaco di Dendera Illustrato. Genova, 1822.

Theophrastus. Enquiry into Plants, Sir Arthur Hort, trans. 1958-59. 2 vols. First printing 1916, LCL.

Thieme, P. Untersuchungen zur Wortkunde und Auslegung des Rig-veda. Halle, 1949.

Thureau-Dangin, F. Rituels Accadiens. Paris, 1921.

Thurneysen, Rudolf. Die irische Helden- und Königssage bis zum 17. Jahrhundert. Halle, 1921.

Tilak, Bal Gangadhar. The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas. Bombay, 1893.

Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, A. Nauck, ed. Hildesheim, 1964. Reprint. BT.

Tregear, Edward. The Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary. Wellington, 1891.

Ungnad, Arthur. Das wiedergefundene Paradies. Breslau, 1923. Kulturfragen 3.

—. See also Das Gilgamesch-Epos.

Usener, Hermann. Götternamen: Versuch einer Lehre van der religiösen Begriffsbildung, 3rd ed. Frankfürt, 1948.

Vajda, Laszlo. “Zur phaseologischen Stellung des Schamanismus,” Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher, vol. 31 (1959), pp. 456-85.

Varāhamihira. The Brihad Sanhita, H. Kern, trans. JRAS, vol. 5 (1871), pp.45-90, 231-88.

Vatican Mythographers. See Scriptores Rerum Mythicarum Latini.

Virgil, H. Rushton Fairclough, trans. Rev. ed. 2 vols. 1954-56. LCL.

Vishnu Purana. A System of Hindu Mythology and Tradition, translated from the original Sanskrit and illustrated by notes! by H. H. Wilson, 3rd ed. Calcutta, 1961. 1st ed. London, 1840.

Vries, Jan de. Altnordisches Etymologlsches Wörterbuch. Leiden, 1961.

Waerden, B. L. van der. “The Thirty-Six Stars” (Babylonian Astronomy 2), JNES, vol. 8 (1949), pp. 6-26.

—. Die Anfänge der Astronomie (Erwachende Wissenschaft 2). Groningen, n.d.

Wainwright, G. A. “A Pair of Constellations,” in Studies Presented to F. L. Griffith (1932), pp. 373-83.

Walde-Hofmann. Lateinisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, von A. Walde. 3rd rev. cd. by J. B. Hofmann. Heidelberg, 1938-56.

Weber, Albrecht. “Die Vedischen Nachrichten von den Naxatra (Mondstationen),” pt. 1: APAW 1860, pp. 283-332; pt. 2: APAW 1862, pp. 267-399.

—. “Miszellen aus dem indogermanischen Familienleben,” in *Festgruss an Rudolf *von Roth (1893), pp. 135-38.

Weidner, Ernst F. Handbuch der Babylonischen Astronomie. Leipzig, 1915. Assyriologische Bibliothek 23.1.

—. “Babylonische Hypsomatabilder,” OLZ, vol. 22 (1919), pp. 10-16.

—. “Ein babylonisches Kompendium der Himmelskunde,” AJSL, vol. 40 (1924), pp. 186-208.

—. “Gestirn-Darstellungen auf Babylonischen Tontafeln,” SOAW, vol. 254 (1967), no. 2.

—. See also Reallexikon der Assyriologie.

Weinreich, Otto. “Zum Tode des Grossen Pan,” ARW, vol. 13 (1910), pp.467-73.

Werner, Edward T. C. Myths and Legends of China. London-Calcutta, 1927.

—. A Dictionary of Chinese Mythology. New York, 1961. 1st ed. Shanghai, 1932.

Werner, Helmut. “Die Verstirnung des Osiris-Mythos,” IAfE, vol. 16 (1952), pp. 147-62.

Wheeler, Post. The Sacred Scriptures of the Japanese. New York, 1952.

White, Lynn, Jr. Medieval Technology and Social Change. Oxford, 1962.

Wiedemann, Alfred. Herodots Zweites Buch, mit sachlichen Erläuterungen. Leipzig, 1890.

Wildhaber, Robert. Das Sundenregister auf der Kuhhaut. FFC, vol. 163 (1955).

Williamson, Robert W. Religious and Cosmic Beliefs of Central Polynesia. Cambridge, 1924. 2 vols.

Witzel, Maurus. “Texte zum Studium Sumerischer Tempel und Kultzentren,” An. Or., vol. 4 (1932).

—. “Tammuz-Liturgien und Verwandtes,” An. Or., vol. 10 (1935).

—. “Zur sumerischen Mythologie,” Or., vol. 17 (1948), pp. 393-415.

Wörterbuch der Aegyptiscben Sprache. Im Auftrag der Deutschen Akademien hrsg. von Adolf Erman und Hermann Grapow. 2nd reprint. Berlin, 1957. 6 vols.

Wörterbuch der Mythologie. Herausgegeben von H. W. Haussig. Stuttgart, n.d. Pt. 1 ca. 1960.

Wohleb, L. “Die altrömische und hethitische evocatio,” ARW, vol. 25 (1927), pp. 206-09.

Wou Tch’eng Ngen, Si Yeou ki, ou le Voyage en Occident. Traduit du Chinois par Louis Avenol. Paris, 1957, 2 vols.

Zaehner, R. C. Zurvan: A Zoroastrian Dilemma. Oxford, 1955.

Zahan, D., and de Ganay, S. “Études sur la cosmologie des Dogon et des Bambara du Soudan Français,” Africa, vol. 21 (1951), pp. 13-23.

Zenker, Rudolf. *Boeve-Amlethus: Das Altfranzösische Epos van Boeve de Hamtone und der *Ursprung der Hamletsage. Berlin, 1905. Literar-historische Forschungen 32.

Zerries, Otto. “Sternbilder als Ausdruck jägerischer Geisteshaltung in Südamerika,” Paideuma, vol. 5 (1951), pp. 220-35.

Zimmern, Heinrich. “Zum babylonischen Neujahrhfest,“ BVSGW, vol. 58 (1906), pp. 126-56; vol. 70 (1918), pt. 3, 52 pp.

—. “Die sieben Weisen Babyloniens,” ZA, vol. 35 (1923), pp. 151-54.

—. “Zur Herstellung der grossen babylonischen Götterliste An-(ilu) Anum,” BVSGW, vol. 63 (1911), pt. 4.

Zinzow, Adolf. Die Hamletsage an und mit verwandten Sagen erläutert. Halle,1877.

The Zohar. Translated by Harry Sperling and Maurice Simon. London, 1956. 5 vols. 1st ed. 1933.

Index

Abaton, the, 303

Abu Ma’shar, 228

Accius, 23

Acheloüs, 189

Acheron, 184, 185, 195, 198

Acherusian lake, 184

Achilles, 272, 273,422; shield of, 385

Adad, 297

Adam, 224, 309; and Eve, 149

Adam of Bremen, 206

Adams, John Couch, 8

Adonis, 249, 284, 285

Aegir, 208, 209, 294

Aelianus, 42 I

Aeneas, 192

Aeneas Sylvius, Pope, 338, 339

Aeneid, 196

Aeschylus, 118, 179, 312

Aesir, the, 154-155, 160, 161, 163

Afrasiyab, Shah of Turan, 37-39, 40, 84, 201, 265, 340

Africa: Indians of, 246; study of, 353

Agamemnon, 273

Agaria, 219

Agastya, 263, 264, 395

Agni, 157, 159, 322, 382, 395,428-429

Agrippa d’Aubigné, quoted, 317

Aigokeros (Capricornus), 63

Akkadian (language), 449

Albania, 79n

Al-Biruni, 8, 30n, 83, 215n, 221

Albright, W. F., 124-125, 211, 295, 401, 419, 449

Alcmaeon, 202

Alcor, 264, 385

Aldebaran, 398, 437

Alexander, king of Macedon, 201, 202, 256, 422; and the Gordian knot, 237-238; “Romaunt of,” 313; linked to Gilgamesh, 313-315, 336, 419

Al-Farghani, 137

Alföldi, Andreas, 371

Alice in Wonderland, 51n

Al-jadi (Polaris), 138

Al-Kazvini, 138

Allen, Richard H., 255

Aloe, Lake, 216-217

Alphonsus of Castile, Tables of, 271

Amaltheia, 259,426

Amaterasu, 169, 292,425

Ambales, dream of, 37; “Saga,” 19, 23

Ambrosia, 259, 426

America: Snaebjörn and the discovery of, 94; myths of, 311; and Columbus, 338

Amlaghe, 20

Amlaidhe, 20

Amleth, 12-18; meaning of, 20; parallel with Kai Khusrau, 37, 39; division of story of, 82-83

Amlethus, son of Orvandil, 155, 354, 367, 430; destruction of hall by, 174; and Samson, 176; riddle of, 271

Amlodhi, 2, 19, 20, 35; mill of, 87

Amritamanthana, 383

Anahita, goddess, 40, 262

Ananke, 190

Anat, 291, 367

Anaximander, v, 82, 18m, 188, 330, 376

Anchises, 193

Anderson, R. B., 366

Andreas, 313

Angels, 396

Angkor, 7, 162

Animal stories and myth, 52. See also Bull; Cats; Fox star; Turtle; Wolves

An-Nadim, 282

Antares, 243, 437, 450

Anthropology, social, 71

Antiochus, 210, 239

Anu, 125, 291, 297, 303,431,451; Way of, 434, 437

Anunnaki, the, 297, 303

Aphrodite, 177

Apis, 285

Apocalypse, 44n

Apocalypses, 335

Apollinaire, quoted, 242 I

Apollo, 428, 447

Apollodorus, 117-118, 408

Apollon, 369

Apollonios Rhodios, 251, 254

Apsu, 153, 270, 301, 320, 324, 420, 435

Aqht, 291

Aquarius, 244, 256-257

Aquinas, Thomas, 75

Ara, 424

Arabs, 271, 315

Arallu, 450

Ararat, Mount, 32 3

Aratus, 245, 254, 257, 385

Arawaks, the, 166, 246

Arcadia, 278

Archaic world, dates of, 340-342

Archimedes, 72, 188, 342

Arcturus, 437

Ares, 176, 428. See also Mars

Argo, 257, 258, 265, 281, 291. 302; turtle as prow of, 369; wood of, 447

Argonauts, 172, 254, 263, P18

Arhippa Perttunen, 111

Aries, 434; Kai Khusrau, on, 44; Age of, 60, 318, 341; and Heimdal, 159

Aristarchus, 342

Aristophanes, 3 I I

Aristotle, vi, 144, 177, 32. 286, 340, 342; on astronomy, 4; on circularity, 48; and mathematics, 7; on esoteric doctrine, 118; on gods as first substances, 150; on the Milky Way, 252; quoted, 326

Arjuna, 79, 291, 310

Ark, the, 323; appearance of, 219; Utnapishtim’s, 221, 297; as cubic, 222-223, 435; as a ship, 367

Armenia, 284

Arriaga, 226

Arrianus, 237

Arthur, King, 34, 46, 335, 347, 360, 418; myth of, 51; and Excalibur, 235

Arundati, 385

Aruns Velthymnus, 116

Aryans, 360

Asa, 234

Asgard, 156, 161

Assur-nasir-apli, Annals of, 220

Assyria, 133, 266-267, 288

Astrology, 50, 228; of Greeks, 64; problem of, 74-75; as early lingua franca, 345

Astronomy: as source of myth, 3-5, 324; modern indifference to, 60; pre-supposed by astrology, 345. See also planets and constellations by name

Asura, the, 81, 82, 152, 153, 263, 372

Atharva Veda, 140, 158, 227, 233, 321

Athena, 264

Athenaeus, 118, 367

Atlas, 251

Atrahasis, 298

Atreus, House of, 174

Attila, and the Nibelungen story, 335

Attis, 285

Atum, 151

Auden, W. H., quoted, 213

Auriga, 255, 256, 258, 259, 261, 264, 426; chariot of, 266, 399

Aurva, 392-393

Avalokiteshvara, 130

Avesta, 39-40, 146; Kavi Usan in, 37; on Sirius, 215, 216

Axis, world, 232-234; Heimdal as, 158-159; accompanying frame of, 235

Aztecs, 8, 290, 321

Baal, 128

Babel, Tower of, 249

Babylon, 6, 7, 195, 219, 266, 297, 307, 324, 432; gods of, 124,244; Saturn in, 136; astronomy of, 142. 261, 314; Creation Epic of, 153, 166, 294; and epic of Gilgamesh, 288; Tower of, 303

Bach, J. S., 346

Balarama, 79, 310

Balder, 155, 160, 161, 285

Balmer, 61

Barabudur, temple of, 240

Barb, Alfons A., 148

Barbarossa, Kaiser, 46

Barthes, Roland, 343

Bastian, Adolf, 164n

Baumann, Hermann, 311

Be’ersheba, 448

Bel, tomb of, 303

Bella Coola Indians, 253

Bellerophon, 37

Berard, 209

Bergelmer, 92-93, 141, 363, 366

Berger, E. H., 190

Bergson, Henri, 340

Berossos, 162, 418-419

Bertholet, Alfred, 396

Betelgeuse, 361

Bethlehem, star of, 244

Bhagavata Purana, 138

Bible, the, 4, 115

Bieka Galles (Mars), 130

Big Dipper, 236, 266, 301, 407, 415, 451; as thigh of bull, 415, 416

Blacksmiths. See Smiths

Bloomfield, Maurice, 374

Boanerges, Sons of Thunder, 225, 226

Boghazköi, 450

Böhl, F. M. Th. de Liagre, 290, 410, 433, 435

Boissacq, 430

Boll, Franz, x, 4, 44n, 206, 415, 423-424

Bön-po, 123

Book of the Dead, 73, 120, 132, 151

Book of Iceland Settlements, 94

Borneo, 166, 213

Borobudur, temple at, 124

Bouvard, 327

Bow and arrow, in constellations, 216, 321

Bradfield, 209

Brahma, 393

Brandaen, 271

Breasted, J. H., 119

British Columbia, 3 18

Brjam, 19, 35, 85

Bromwich, Rachel, 30n

Browne, Sir Thomas, 60

Brugsch, K. H., 414

Brunelstraat (Milky Way), 248

Brunetto, 197

Bruno, Giordano, 48, 342

Brutus. See Lucius Junius Brutus

Bulfinch, Thomas, 132

Bull: sacrifice of, 125, 404-405; thigh of, as Big Dipper, 415-416

Bundahishn, 247

Bunyan, Paul, 31

Burgess, E., 398, 401

Burns, Robert, 91

Burrows, Eric, 413

Cadmus, 428

Cain, 390

Calypso, 209

Cambodia, 166

Cambyses, 84

Cancer, 314, 403, 434; Gate of, 242

Can Grande della Scala, 279

Canopus, 73, 211, 257, 258, 264, 265. 268, 271, 318; as static, 269; as pilot star to Ship of the Dead, 281; and the horse’s head, 395; wife of, 416-417; Eridu as, 420; Nibiru as, 431

Capaneus, 197

Capella the Goat, 259

Capricorn, 242

Casanova, P., 416

Cassirer, Ernst, 326-328

Castor, 210, 32 1

Catasterisms, of Eratosthenes, 256, 257, 265

Catlo’ltq, 214-215, 318-319, 321

Cats, 279

Cedrenus, 390

Celtic myth, related to Kalevala, 26

Censorinus, 162

Centaur, 424

Cézanne, Paul, 343

Chairemon, 427

Chaldea, 282

Chanina, Rabbi, 396

Chariot, of Phaethon, 266

Charles Martel, 75

Charles’ Wain, 238, 266

Charpentier, Jarl, 360-361

Charybdis, 204, 209

Cheremissians, 26 .

Cherokee, 243, 249, 406, 407, 425; Story of whirlpool, 207; story of corn mill, 389

Chess, 161-162

Childe, Gordon, 388

Chimalpahin, 120

China, 216, 299; Saturn in, 136, 147, 261; Samson in, 166; common myths from, 311

Chiriguano, the, 247

Christ, 114, 197, 221, 223, 261, 330, 341, 355, 423

Christensen, Arthur, 370

Christianity: negation of Timaean scheme, 309; and the archaic world, 341

Chronos, 134, 189-190; and Kronos, 135n, 373-376

Chronos Aion, 189

Chwolson, D., 4, 282, 283

Cicero, 23, 138, 277. 376

Cimmerians, the, 335

Cipactli, 248

Circe, 198, 291

Circularity. and myth, 484

Cleasby, Richard, 156n

Clemens Alexandrinus, 51n

Cleomedes, 137, 159

Clytemnestra, 175

Cocytus. river, 184, 196, 198

Coffin Texts, 120, 132

Coleridge, S. T., quoted, 225

Colossus of Crete, 197, 201

Columbus, Christopher, 337, 338; sources of, 338-339

Comparetti, D., 98, 116, 117

Conjunctions, Trigon of, 248. 399

Constellations: and quadrangular earth, 62; names of, 120; relation of signs to, 144-145. See also

constellations by name

Copernicus, 60, 310, 342

Cornford, F. M., 230-231, 273-274, 307-308, 422-423, 424. 426

Corona, 355

Cosmography, and geography, 63

Cosmology, 46-47, 48; myth and, 50, 52-53, 56, 151; rules of, expressed in language of myth, 58

Cosmos, 188; frame of, 23, 36

Creation: described by Timaeus, 306; stories of, 382-383

Crete, 178, 194

Creuzer, Friedrich, 285, 286

Crocodile. 248

Cross, wood of the, 227,447

Cube: as Saturn’s figure, 212-223; ark as, 435

Cuchulainn, 31

Culture, vs. society, 71

Cumont, Franz, 284, 326

Cuna Indians, 213, 247, 447

Curse of the Miller Woman, the, 117

Curtius, 423

Curwen, E. Cecil, 387-388

Dadhyan̄k, 393

da Gama, Vasco, 337

DaM.k, 370

d’Ailly, Pierre, 338

d’Alembert, Jean, x

Danes, thunderstones of, 226

Daniel, 418-419; vision of, 195

Dante, 46, 279, 296, 337; as bridge between two epochs, 75; sources used by, 118; location of Purgatory by, 193; journey of Virgil and, 194-198; quoted, 204, 250; whirlpool described by, 204

Dapinu, 402-403

Dardanos, 385

Darius Codomanus (Dara), 84

Darmesteter, James, 76

Darwin, Age of, 68

Dates: related to Great Conjunctions, 268; of archaic world, 340-343. See also Time

David, King, 214, 249. 264, 421; and the Abyss, 220

Day, Florence, 411

Décamps, 388

Deimel, Anton, 409

Delphi, 447

Demeter, 170, 259, 280, 424, 425

Demiurge, the, 51, 306-307, 341

Democritus, 340

Democritus of Abdera, ix

Dendera: inscriptions of, 73; Zodiac of, 321,405,415,424

Denmark, 86

Descartes, René, 65, 343

Destruction, motif of, 176

Deucalion, 57, 63; Flood of, 279

Deus Faber, 128, 129, 372, 373, 445

Deva, the, 372

de Vries, J., 362-363, 377

Dharma, 79, 309

Dhruva, Prince, 138, 141

Dhul-Karnein, 336

Diakonoff, I. M., 410

Dice, casts of, 161

Dieterich, Albrecht, 196

Dieterlen, Germaine, 53, 353

Dio Cassius, 23

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, 222

Dionysos,32, 81, 287

Dioscuri, the, 226

Dittrich, Ernst, 66

Divine Comedy, sources of, 118

Dodecahedron, the world as, 187-188

Dog names, 279

Dogon, the, 53-55, 60, 353

Dorotheos of Sidon, 252

Dowson, John, 392

Draco, 282

Druidism, 8

Drums, mythical: as device of shaman, 124-128; Chinese, 125-126; of the Mande, 126

Dryden, John, quoted, 349

Dümichen, J., 73

Dumont, P. E., 114-125

Dumuzi, 284

Dupuis, Charles, viii, x, 346, 403; quoted, 230

Dyak, 239

Ea, 267, 270, 281, 324, 419, 431; Way of, 434

Earendel, 355-357

Earth: defined in language of myth, 58, 62; and equinoxes, 58-59; and the zodiacal band, 61; and motion of sky, 66; composition of mythical, 235; Ersetu as, 451

Ebeling, Erich, 266, 420

Eben Shetiyyah, 220,263-264,421,423, 435

Ecliptic, pole of, 143; and whirlpool, 240

Ecuador, 166

Edda, 141, 223, 294, 354,425; vision of world-age in, 154-156; list of heiti in, 378

Eden: serpent of, 222; Tree of Life in, 223

Edzard, D.O., 267, 409

Egypt, 247, 262, 383, 389, 405-406; language of, 73; story of Setna, 113-114; names of constellations in, 120, 216; Saturn in, 129, 136; and Ptah, 222; and the legend of Phaethon, 253; ambiguity of, as term, 282; Pan in, 287; interpretation of mnj.t in, 414-417; Sagittarius in, 424

Einstein, Albert, vi, 65, 342

Eisenmenger, J. A., 390

Eisler, Robert, 189, 230, 264, 374, 418

el-Buqat, 282, 284

Eleazar b. Pedath, Rabbi, 396

Electra, 385

Eleusis, 259, 424, 425

Elton, Oliver, 12

Emerson, R. W., quoted, 76

Enakim, 115

Enki/Ea, 124, 135, 146, 153, 223, 265, 281; Enmesharra as, 267; and Gilgamesh, 288; and Utnapishtim, 297-298; son-in-law of, 301

Enkidu, 289, 292, 402, 405, 442, 447

Enlil, 289, 290, 297, 298, 324, 431; Way of, 434

Enmesharra, 266-267

Enoch, 77-78, 360; Book of, 152

Enuma elish, 153, 430, 434, 436, 448

Epimenides, 121

Epinomis, quoted, 43

Epiphanius, 416

Epitherses, 275

Epopeus, 422

Equinoctial colure, 212

Equinoxes, 62; out of position, 153-154

Equinoxes, Precession of, 58-59, 325; named by Hipparchus, 66; significance of, 61-68; described, 142-144; and Copernican system, 145; related to Trigon of Great Conjunctions, 268; relation of Sirius to, 286

Er the Armenian, 230-231

Era, 323, 324, 325, 413, 417

Era-Epos, 323, 436, 448, 451

Eratosthenes, 256, 257, 265, 424

Erichthonios (Auriga), 264, 266

Eridanus, 193, 196, 210, 23?, 251, 166; as the river Po, 154, 156; dual nature of, 155; confusion of with Eridu, 157-258; as whirlpool, 258

Eridu (Hvergelmer), 111, 210-211, 163, 165, 318, 448, 449; etyamology of, 257; stylus of, 301; me from, 301, 304; source of fire, 322; creation story, 420

Erman,Grapow, 73, 414

Ersetu, 449, 451

Esagil, 435

Esau, 396, 405

Esthonia, 26, 118, 397; story of Kalevipoeg, 30n; mythical tree in, 447

Etana, 114

Etemenanki, 303

Etruscans, the, 116

Eudoxos, 72, 311

Euhemeros, 50

Euripides, 254

Euripus, 206-207, 238; axis of Roman circus as, 239

Evil, origin of, 149

Evolution, drawbacks of belief in, 68-71

Ezra, 419

Fable, vs. myth, 47

Fanggen, 277

Faridûn, 370

Färöer dialect, 91

Fas al-rahha, 137

Fenek, 249

Fengö, 12-18, 367

Feng Shen Yen I, 7

Fenja, 88, 158, 380, 388

Ferryman, 430-437. See also Nibiru Festus, 422

Feuchtwang, D., 421

Finland, 26, 113, 223, 312; story of Kullervo in, 27-35; and Kaleva, 115, 155; and the maelstrom, 205, 238; and the wood of the Cross, 227; mythical trees in, 446-447

Finnish Folklore Fellows, 117

Fiote, 246, 253

Firdausi, 36, 39, 43, 46, 83, 68, 283, 372; on the mythical period, 84; knowledge of astrology, 117; story of Kavag by, 370-371

Fire: astronomical, 140, 159, 321; rules relating to discovery of, 317

Fire sticks, 321; part of skambha, 311; fetching of, 322

Fitzgerald, Edward, 45

Flaubert, Gustave, 327

Floods: mythical, 57, 323; and sinking of constellations, 63; causes of, 219; arks and, 119; and Utnapishtim, 297

Forbes, R. J, 388

Forgetfulness, chair of, 408

Fornander, A., 201

Fox star, 385

Frazer, Sir James George, 69, 91, 111, 166, 281, 320, 326; Jewish legend quoted by, 386

Frederick II, Emperor, 197

Freud, S., 450

Freyr, 87, 93, 153, 285; death of, 157, 160, 364

Frobenius, vii, 390

Frodhi, 87, 285, 364, 380; mill of, 88-89, 146

Gadd, C. J., 439, 441

Galaxy, 279; and the ecleptic, 241; myth of Phaethon, 250-252. See also Milky Way

Galileo, 10, 48, 61, 143, 310, 342

Games, board, 161

Gandhi, Mohandes, 329

Ganesha, rat of, 365

Ganga, 259, 262

Ganges, river, 256, 250-260

Garsiwas, 38

Gates of Night and Day, 200

Gautama, Prince, 292

Geb, 406

Geldner, K., 428-429

Gemini, 242, 244, 321, 420

Genesis, Book of, 152

Genzmer, Felix, 365

Geoffrey of Viterbo, 418

Geography, as cosmography, 63

Georgics, 193, 258

Gering, Hugo, 366, 378, 386 Gertrude, nun, 294

Gervase of Tilbury, 423

Gesta Danorum, 12

Gibbon, Edward, 251

Gibil, 322, 429

Gideon, 168, 174

Gilgamesh, 42n, 130, 200, 202, 208, 209, 238, 257, 339, 411; epic of, 288-295, 300-301, 419, 436; Alexander as replica of, 313-315, 336, 419; and fire, 316; name of, 323; astronomical implications of, 323, 404; excursus on, 430-45 I; ferryman in epic of, 430-437; trees in epic of, 437-450

Ginnungagap, 234

Glaukos, 202

Gnostics, 131, 240

Godfrey of Viterbo, 46

Gods, as stars, 177

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 10, 333

Gog and Magog, enclosing of, 315

Golden Age, 146-147; end of, 149; in the Edda, 154-155; position of Milky Way in, 258; dates of, 340-342

Golden Bough, 69

Golden Fleece, 318

Gollancz, I., 20, 356, 357; on Lucius Junius Brutus, 21; on Snaebjorn, 24, 87, 94; on Maelstrom, 91, 205; on translation of Snorri, 361-364

Goosseus, R., 364

Gordius, 237-238

Gordon, Cyrus, 402

Gössmann, P. F., 323, 402, 409, 432

Götze, Albrecht, 433

Granet, Marcel, 127, 129

Great Magical Papyrus of Paris, 147

Greece, 225; mythical floods of, 57; and astrology, 64; earth as center of universe in, 66; mythology of, 132 134; story of Phaethon in, 263, 267; Weil on, 330

Grégoire, Henri, 364

Grégoire de Tours, 10

Griaule, Marcel, vii, 53, 327, 347, 353

Grimm, Jacob, 158, 271, 277, 354; on Orendel, 356-357; on Heimdal, 387; on horse’s head,

395-396; on Lake Eim, 397

Grimm, W., 133n

Grimnismal, 162

Grotte (Frodhi’s quern), 88-89, 107, 146; derivation of, 91; Freyr and, 93; parallel with Sampo, 111, 112; and Maelstrom, 205

Gundel, W., 228, 296

Guthrie, W. K. C., 238

Guyana, Indians of, 217, 246

Gwyon, 347

Gylfaginning, 156, 160; last paragraph of, 163

Gylfi, 160-161, 163

Hackelberg, 249

Hades, 407, 437; voyage of Odysseus to, 198-199. See also Underworld

Haeckel, Ernst, 71

Hagar, Stansbury, 243

Hagen, 335

Hahn, J. G. von, 90n

Hallberg, 386

Hallinskidi (Heimdal), 158, 386

Hamel, A. G. van, 161

Hamlet, 360, 363; as starting point, 1-2; contrasted with Amleth, 18-19; and Lucius Junius Brutus, 21; and Ophelia, 34; forms of, 50; Icelandic origins of, 86-87, 95; as Mars and Saturn, 176

Hamlet, quoted, 137

Hanuman, monkey-god, 403

Haosravah, 36

Harranians, the: planetary heptogram of, 4; on Mars, 176; Tammuz festival of, 282, 284

Harris, Rendel, 225-226

Harrison, Jane E., 189, 190, 274, 320

Hausravah, river, 201, 217

Havelock the Dane, 20

Hawaii, 163, 201

Hawkins, Gerald, 69

Hegel, G. W. F., 149

Heidel, Alexander, 288, 410, 420, 433

Heimdal, 155, 387; nine mothers of, 157-158

Hektor, 163

Helios, 251

Hephaistos, 128, 177, 201, 259, 264, 320; thrown by Zeus, 272-273

Hera, 272

Heracles, 167, 287. See also Herakles

Heraclitus, 7, 162, 240

Heraclitus the Obscure, v

Herakles, 214, 246, 422

Herimanus Contractus of I Reichenau, 359

Hermes, 282, 348; father qf Pan, 276, 277

Hermes Trismegistos, 210, 261, 299

Herodotus, 37; on Pan, 287

Hesiod, 120, 146, 153, 154, 190, 194, 195, 335; on Styx, 199, 200; on Phaethon, 267

Hicetas, 310

Hieroglyphics, 72-73

Higgins, Godfrey, 256

Hildebrand, 335

Hinke, W. J., 409

Hinze, Oscar Marcel, 400

Hipparchus, 66, 142, 143

Hippopotamus, Isis as, 415

Historia de Preliis, 20

History: and reality, 46; and myth, 50, 334, 339; and evolution, 70; reconstructed by Kepler, 399

Hittites, the, 288

Hocart, 221

Hoder, 160, 161

Hollander, John, 9

Holmberg, Sandman, 222

Holmberg, Uno, 123, 124, 125, 130n, 247, 382, 447

Hologram, 56

Homer, 91, 116, 183, 189, !90, 295, 336, 385, 389, 437; use of preexistent materials by, 117; voyage

of Odysseus to Hades by, 198-199, 200; geography of, 209; on Kronos, 239; Weil on, 330

Hommel, Fritz, 409

Honduras, 243, 295

Hora Galles (Jupiter), 130

Horapollo, 427

Horse’s head, 392-396

Horus, 406, 417, 430

Horvandillus, 354

Hrolf Kraki, 20

Huang-ti, the Yellow Emperor, 50; as Saturn, 129, 135

Hubal, 221

huluppu-tree, 439, 447

Humba, 289, 403

Humbaba (Huwawa), 289, 290, 403-404

Humboldt, Baron Alexander von, x, 326

Hunrakin, 126, 166, 248

Huns, the, 315, 335

Hurrians, 288, 314

Husing, G., 403

Huwawa (Humbaba), 289, 314; cedar of, 437-438

Hvarna, 40, 265

Hvergelmer (Eridu), 111, 208, 209, 234

Hyades, the, 166, 175, 177, 398-399

Hyginus,312

Hyllos, 422

lahwe, 222

Ibn Wa’shijja, 92, 282

Iceland, 162, 311, 364; myth of Amlodhi in, 2, 19; and Denmark, 86; and Ireland, 94-95

Ideler, Ludwig, 4, 138

I-Ging, 120

Iliad, 44, 116, 330, 383; story of Hephaistos’ fall in, 272-273

Ilmarinen, the smith, 31, 97, 98-103, 128; stealing of the Sampo by, 104-107

Inanna, 440

Incantation, 111

Incarnation, Christian doctrine of, 341

India, 65, 146, 204, 309, 389; and shamanism, 123; simile of turning millstone, 138; importance of numbers in, 162-163; planetary symbolism in, 240; and the Milky Way, 248n; Eridanus and Ganges, 256, 259; Phaethon in, 263; Kāla in, 374; and Rohini’s wain, 398; mythical trees 111, 444

Indians, American, 7, 320, 347; on reincarnation, 243; on the Milky Way, 246-247. See also Cherokee, Maya, etc.

Indonesia, Rama epic of, 214

Indra,79, 166, 310, 372, 393

Invariance, myth of, v-vi

Iran, 36, 84; shamanism in, 123

Iranians, 78, 80, 374

Ireland, Snaebjörn’s connection with, 94

Irish harp (cruit), 368

Ina (Era), 323

Inagal, 412

Isengrim, 430

Ishara tam.tim, 244, 295, 409, 450

Ishtar, 215, 216, 290, 291-292, 320, 440

Isis, 249, 414-415, 425, 448

Ivalde, 155

Jacobsen, Thorkild, 265

Jakobsen, Jakob, 366

Jambushad, 92

James and John (Boanerges), 225, 226

Jamshyd, 47, 50, 84, 92, 283, 285

Janbûshâd, 283, 285

Japan, 168-169, 338, 383,425

Java, 124, 240

Jehovah, 223

Jenghiz Khan, 128, 335

Jensen, Peter, 295, 420

Jeremias, Alfred, 214, 409, 432

Jerusalem, 22 I

Jews, 42 I; myth of ark by, 219; myth of the Abyss by, 220; myth of Noah’s flood by, 386

Jiriczek, O. L., 37

Joachim of Flora, 334

Job, 390; Book of, quoted, 263

John Barleycorn, 284

Johnsson, Finnur, 378

Jokes, function of, 425

Joshua, 174

Jubar, 355

Jung, C. G., 75

Jungle Books, 52

Jupiter (planet), 130, 239, 289, 314, 324, 372; in Kepler’s figure, 136; conjunction of with Saturn, 244, 268; measurement by, 271; and Nibiru, 432

Justinian, 36

Ka’aba, 221, 423

Kaianian dynasty, 36

Kai Ka’us, 37-38, 40-41, 83, derivation of name, 371, 372;

Kai Khusrau, 36, 38-39, 83, 201, 217, 247, 265, 285, 335, 360; parallel with Amlethus, 37, 39; and the nature of myth, 47, 84; and Hamlet, 50; parallel with Mahabharata, 76

Kai Kubad, 83

Kāla, 373-376

Kaleva, 96; identity of, 115

Kalevala, 26,96, 113, 119, 121; story of, 96-98; Kullervo in, 114; oak in, 223, 446

Kalhu, temple at, 221

Kali Yuga, 82, 85, 309

Kalypso, 295

Kampers, Franz, 418-419

Kamsa, Uncle, 360-361

Kane, 164, 201

Kansa (Kamsa), 80, 81

Kantele, 104, 107, 108, 369

Kara Pār, 235

Karelia, 447

Kartikeya (Skanda), 157

Kaulu, 175

Kauravas, 78

Kavag, the Smith, 129, 370-371

Kavy Usa, 371

Kavya Ushanas, 372

Kayanides, 371

Kedalion, 178

Kees, Hermann, 405-406

Keimer, Louis, 427

Keith, A. B., 80

Kennedy, E. S., 400

Kepler, Johannes, 61, 221, 222, 228, 342; transition figure of, 9, 136, 268, 334; as the last Archais, 74; on the harmony of the spheres, 151; on planetary conjunctions, 399-400

Kerényi, Karl, 32, 130

Keynes, John Maynard, 9-10

Khusrau Anushirvan, 36

Kiho-tumu, 299

Kipling, Rudyard, 49, 51, 311

Kircher, Athanasius, S.J., ix, x, 4, 91, 205, 210, 346, 361

Kleombrotos, 202

Kochob, as “mill peg,” 137

Kolyvanovic, 115

Kombabos, 404

Koran, 257, 315

Koshar-wa-Hasis, 118

Kramer, S. N., 438-439, 441

Krappe, A. H., 364

Krates of Pergamon, 198, 173

Krause, Ernst, 379

Krishna, 78, 80-82, 83, 85; return of into Vishnu, 309

Kritzinger, H. H., 400

Krohn, Kaarle, 27, 130n, 447

Kronos, 132-133, 146, 14_, 189, 100, 210, 221, 239, 159, 2_S; Orphic Hymn to, 132-133; Proclus on, 134; as Chronos, 134-135, 37x-376; Susanowo as, 176; Zeus son of, 263, 267, 280, 299; stag as, 319; Ogygian, 418-419

Ku, 201

Kuan-yin, 130

K’uei, 127-128

Kuhn, Adalbert, 381, 382

Kullervo Kalevanpoika, 2_35, 50, 81, 104, 115, 360, 430; and Hamlet, 50; son of Kaleva, 97; position of, 114; as World Observer, 13f; sea measured by, 171

Kumu honua, 201

Kumulipo, 7, 163-164

Kynosoura, 168

Labat, 439

Lake Eim, story of, 397-398

Lamaism, Tibetan, 123

Lambert, 301, 303, 448

Landsberger, Benno, 411, 443

Langdon, Stephen, 290, 403, 411

Language: problems of, 72-73; classical vs. contemporary, 343

Lapland, 16, 108, 130

Lascaux, caves at, 347

Lassie, 51

Learning vs. understanding, 118-111

Leibniz, Baron, 9, 74

Lemminkainen, 97, 104, and stealing of the Sampo, 104-107

Leo Grammaticus, 390

Lepsius, 4

Lethe, 406, 425

Leverrier, 8

Lewy, Hildegard, 110-221

Liber Hermetis Trismegisti, 228

Libra, 240-241

Liebig, Justus von, viii

Liebrecht, Felix, 168, 178, 282

I-Iku, 434-436

Lilith, 249, 440, 443

Little Bear, the, 137

Livy, tale of Brutus by, 11-12, 23

Llew Llaw Gyffes, 167

Lockyer, Sir Norman, 68, 141

Lokasenna, 93, 209

Loke, 155, 209, 222, 387, 425

Longfellow, Henry W., 119

Lönnrot, Elias, 26, 27, 33, 111, 116; and the Kalevala, 96, 114; ignorance of archaic background of, 117

Lono, 201

Loth, J., 30n

Louhi, 98, 99, 104, 107, 108, 109

Lucius Junius Brutus, 11-13, 85; and Hamlet, 50

Luckenbill, 41 I

Lucretius, 48

Ludendorff, Hans, 61, 67

Ludr, 92, 111-112, 367

Lugh Lamhfada, 304

Luke, Book of, quoted, 86

Lykaios, Mountain, 278-279

Lykophron, 116

Lyra, 369

Lysimachides, }10

Mabinogi, 365

Macdonell, A. A., 394

Macrobius, 133, 134-135, In, 195, :68; on reincarnation, 242; on Lethe, 407

Maelstrom, 105; origin of, 2

Magi, the, 423

Magni, 215

Mahabharata, 152, 156n, 236, 159, 163, 309, 371; parallel with Kai Khusrau, 76–78; skanda in, 157; equine head in, 392-393; conjunctions in, 401

Mahmud of Ghazna, Sultan, 36

Maimonides, 282

Maiterae (Maitreya), 113

Makalii, 365

Makemson, M. W., 139

Mallarmé, Stephane, 343

Malory, Sir Thomas, 51

Mande, the, 126, 353, 430

Maneros, 285

Mangaians, the, 241, 244

Manicheans, the, 131

Manilius, 250, 155, 257

Manjirae (Manjusri), 113

Mannhardt, Wilhelm, 177, 179

Mansikka, V. J., 223, 391

Maori, the, 65, 174, 110, 161

Marbhan, 368-309

Marco Polo, 338, 423

Marduk, 166, 267, 270, 294, 324, 325; temple of, 297; tomb of, 303; and Nibiru, 432; on the mes-tree, 450

Marquesas Islands, 425

Mars (planet), 130, 239, 285, 307, 324; Skanda as, 157; Susanowo as, 172; Samson as, 176; Dante on, 196-197; identity of, 390, 396; as Zu-bird, 443

Martius, 338

Maskheti (Big Dipper), 415

Mathematics, opposition of Aristotle to, 75

Matthieu, M., 364

Maui, 316

Maya, the, 8, 61, 67, 244, 247, 295, 343; and Hunrakan, 126; story of Zipacna by, 175

Mayer, Maximilian, 212

Mayrhofer, Manfred, 381

McGuire, J. D., x

me, 301, 302, 304

Measures: gift of, 266, 268; planets as,. 271-272; by Zeus, 273; from Eridu, 304; as theme of Greek

thought, 330-331

Mecca, 221

Megara, 425

Memory, fountain of, 408

Memphis (a mime), 118

Menja, 88, 116, 158, 380, 388

Menouthis, 416

Mercer, S., 414

Mercury (planet), 239, 271, 282, 289, 314; Humbaba as, 404

Merlin, 347

Mesopotamia, 303, 424; astronomy of, 66, 216; and shamanism, 123, 124; cities of, 239; story of Phaethon in, 267; fire-god of, 321; mythical trees of, 448

Mes-tree, 437-439, 448, 450

Mexico, 74, 93, 136, 247, 405; Mars in, 176, 307; mythical trees in, 446

Michael Scoms, 228, 258, 309

Mid-air, 249

Midas, son of Gordius, 237

Mikku, 441, 443

Milky Way, the, 162, 211, 213, 230-231, 242, 256, 407, 446; gates to, 244; relation to Precession,

145; for spirits of the dead, 246-247; as Brunelstraat, 248; position of in the Golden Age, 258; and

the Ganges, 260

Mill, the: in fable, 1; Grotte, 88-89; in Homer, 90; Sampo, 98-102, 104-108, 111; broad meaning of, 116; identity of with heaven, 140; motion and destruction of, 146; rotary, 388. See also Grotte; Sampo

Millstone, heavens turning as, 137-138

Milton, John, 135; Samson Agonistes, 165, 174; Paradise Lost quoted, 377

Mithra, 264-265

Mitra, 264

Mitrāvaruna, 164, 165

Mixcouatl, 136

Mnevis, 285

Modi, 225

Mohammed II, 339

Mongols, the, 130, 119, }IS, HS, 311

Moon, 239

Mooney, James, 389

Mordvinians, the, 26, 392

More, Sir Thomas, 51n

Moritz, L. A., 388

Morphology, comparative, 7

Morris, Desmond, 324

Moses, 44n, 60, 257, 315

Mot, 367

Mother Scorpion, 195

Motion, by number vs. by generation, 308

Mouse (Mysing), 364-365

Movers, F. K., 404

Much, R., 386

Muellenhoff, 88

Muller, Max, 326

Mundilfoeri, 139, 158, 377, 382

Mundill (Mundell), 378-383

Mus, Paul, 124

Mûs Parîk, 365

Music: origin of, 7; as expression of world of abstract form, 346

Musical instruments, origin of, 368-369

Mylinos, 116

Myrina, 304

Mysing, 364, 380

Mysingr, 89, 107, 378

Myth: vs. fable, 47; nature of, 48; and history, 50; and science fiction, 51; cosmological information in, 150; used by Plato, 310-311; language of, 311-312; and poetry, 312; ambiguity of, 312-313; long and short forms of, 321; influence of on history, 337

Nabataean Agriculture, 282. 285

Nangaru the Carpenter, 314, 403-404

Nanshe, 301, 417

Near East, shamanism in, 113. See also individual countries by name

Nebrôd, 390

Nebuchadnezzar, dream of, 195

Neckel, Gustav, 366

Nectar, 259, 426

Needham, J., 161

Nefer-ka Ptah, 113

Nemesis, place of in myth, 335-336

Nephthys, 414

Nergal, 297, 323, 324; Gilgamesh as, 448-449

Nets, destruction by use of, 174-175

Neugebauer, O., 414

Newton, Isaac, vi, 61, 342; as magician, 9; and gravitation, 64-65; Age of, 68

New Zealand, Maori of, 65f., 261

Nibelungen, Fall of the, 331

Nibiru, 431-437; explanations of word, 432-435

Nicander, 421

Nicaragua, 243, 244, 295,407

Nidhögger, 443

Niedner, Felix, 366

Nihongi, 7, 168, 171, 174

Nile river, 253, 256, 263, 416-417

Nimin, 288

Nimrod, 166, 177

Nineveh, 239-240

Ningishzida, 367

Ninurta, 133, 297

Noah, 222-223, 298, 386

Nonnos, 251, 252, 255, 385

Normandy, 278

Normann, F., 138n

Norse myth, related to Kalevala, 26

North Pole, 200

Nudimud,270

Number, as unifying principle, 9, 74-75

Numbers: repetition of, 7; significance of, 162; as secret of things, 332

Numenius of Apamea, 188, 196, 239, 240

Nūt, 262

Oak tree, in Kalevala, 446-447

Oannes, 418-419

Ocean, relation of to Phaethon story, 263-265. See also Sea

Oceanus, 184, 199

O’Curry, Eugene, 368-369

Odin, 160, 249, 292

Odysseus, 90, 98, 315, 447; voyage to Hades, 198-199, 200, 273; oar of, 270-271, 302. See also Ulysses

Odyssey, 116, 198, 354, 356; mill in, 90; whirlpool in, 204

Oervandil, 261

Ogotemmêli, 55, 347

Ogygia, 205, 209, 239, 295, 299, 418-419

ogygion, 200

Ohlmarks, Ake, 387

Oikoumene, 64

Oinomaos, 280

Okeanos, 189-191, 198, 203, 214

Okoi of Audista, 111

Olaf Hvitaskald, 163

Old Testament, 120

Olrik, A., 364, 365

Olschki, L., 423

Olympic Games, 268, 280, 401

Omar Khayyam, 45, 47, 113

Omphalos of Delphi, 304

One-Leg, 126-127

Onians, P. B., 189

Ontrei, 111

Open Hole in Heaven, 143

Ophelia, 34

Oppenheim, A. L., 404

Orendel, etymology of, 356-358

Origen, 309

Origins of Scientific Thought, vi

Orion, 166, 175, 247, 353-355; Samson as, 177; zalos near, 210

Orpheus, 7, 222

Orpheus the Thracian, quoted, 137

Orphics, the, 189-190, 242, 267

Orvandil/Eigil (the Archer), 155, 354

Orvandils-tâ, 354-355

Orvendel, 12, 87

Orwandel, 354

Osiris, 281, 285, 299, 303, 414, 448, 449

Ostyaks, 26, 130n

Ovid, 57, 118, 168; on Phaethon, 251, 252, 253, 263, 265

Pali-uli, 201

Pan, 275-277, 278, 285-287, 341

Pandavas, 78, 309

Paranatellonta, 256

Parmenides, 65, 200, 340

Pascal, Blaise, 7 I

Pastor of Hermas, 223

Paulus Alexandrinus, 44n

Pausanias, 69, 20m, 268, 408, 422

Pawnee, 243, 309; Skidi-Pawnee, 384

Pécuchet, 327

Pegasus, 297, 420

Pelops, 280, 386

Penelope, mother of Pan, 276, 277

Periodic system of the elements, 61

Persephone, 280

Persia, 36, 129

Perspective, as token of Scientific Revolution, 342

Peru, 225, 226

Petavius, 4

Petron, 202

Petronius, 138

Phaedo, 206, 208, 220

Phaedrus, 305-306, 328, 348

Phaethon, 210, 250-252, 258, 347; survivals of theme of, 253-254; placed among stars, 255; significance of, 256; and the oceans, 263-265; as Saturn, 265

Phaidon, 195

Pherecydes, 223

Pherekydes, 189

Philae, 303

Philistines, 166, 167, 173-174

Philolaos, 231-232, 310

Phlegethon river, 195

Photius, 422

Physics, of the Stoics, 64

Picus, 291

Pied Piper, the, 7

Fiero della Francesca, 224

Pindar, 286

Pingree, D., 400

Piran, 38-39

Pisces, Age of, 244, 268, 341

Pishdadian dynasty, 36

Pisistratus, 116

Plain of Truth, triangular, 202-203

Planets: as measuring, 271-272; as instruments of time, 306-307. See also planets by name

Plato, vi 3, 57, 134, 149, 193, 265, 271, 282, 330, 383, 389; and the language of myth, 6, 47, 51, 305, 310-313, 328; time machine of, 143, 190; on Socrates’ last tale, 179; on world as dodecahedron, 187; on the frame of the cosmos, 230-232; on the sun, 246; on legend of Phaethon, 252, 273; Timaeus of, on creation of souls, 306-310; on a cosmic model, 333; on time vs. space, 340, 376; on language and memory, 347-348; on Lethe, 406-407

Pleiades, 125, 157, 164n, 177, 213, 239, 307; and Zipacna, 175; Lyre of the Muses, 369; on shield of Achilles, 385; and Noah’s flood, 386

Pliny, 195, 215

Plough-star, 321

Plutarch, 134, 187, 101-103, 267, 383; story of death of Pan by, 275-276, 281, 282, 341; on Kronos, 299, 419

Po, river, Eridanus as, 254, 256

Poetry: early concept of, 119; and the idiom of myth, 312

Pogo, Alexander, 141

Pohja, 233

Pohjola, 98, 99, 101, 104

Polaris: and Saturn, 136; as peg, 140; and the Milky Way, 260-261

Polemon, 320

Pole stars, 59, 141; shifting of, 142-143; removing of, 383-384

Poliziano, 11

Pollux, 321

Polynesia, 425, 437; Dechend’s work in, vii-viii; myths of, 163, 316; Orion in, 166; and the whirlpool, 213, 239; and reincarnation, 242-243; myths about rat in, 365

Poseidon, 315,437

Pramantha, 139, 140, 320, 382

Pratap Chandra Roy, 394

Precession of Equinoxes. See Equinoxes

Proclus, 134, 136, 188, 203n, 259, 267, 268, 299, 346; on fox star, 385

Procyon, 289, 314, 403

Prometheus, 139; Kronos as, 133; Catlo’ltq story of, 318-319; derivation of name, 379-383

Proto-Pythagoreans, 6

Psalms, Book of, quoted, 86

Ptah 129, 135, 222, 285, 29, 38, 427

Ptolemy, vi, 50, 143, 257, 388; Geography of, 63-64; on fixed stars, 307

Pukku, 441, 443

Puranas, 78, 259-260

Pyramid Texts, 120, 132, 414, 443

Pyriphlegethon, river, 184, 195, 198

Pythagoras, v, 121, 174, 187, 279; and mathematics, 6; and music, 369

Pythagoreans, 65, 202-203, 242, 334; on legend of Phaethon, 252-253, 256; tradition of, 310; and mathematical sciences, 330-331

Pytheas, 25

Python, 304, 428, 44

Quecholli, 410

Quechua, the, 166

Querns, rotary, 388. See also Mill

Quetzalcouatl, 42n, 77, 78, 93, 213, 247, 322, 360, 382, 418

Quzistan, 284

Rā, 262, 285, 425

Rabuse, G., 196

Radloff, 123

Radulf, Johan, 130n

Ragnarok, 156, 225

Rama, 214

Ramesside Star Clocks, 414-415

Ran, 208-209, 294

Reality: related to history, 46; not concrete, 57

Recitation, of ancient poetry, 111

Reincarnation, 242-243

Rembrandt van Rijn, 333

Rephaim, 115

Republic, vision of Er the Armenian in, 230-231

Reuter, O. S., 158, 355, 362, 386

Revelation, demons from, 423-424

Reynard the Fox, 248, 347, 430

Rhea, 259,425

Rhône river, 256

Riccioli, 400

Riemschneider, Margarete, 443

Rigel, 210, 261, 355

Rigveda, 44, 120, 139, 140, 161, 263, 264; Kavya Ushanas in, 37, 371; Agni in, 157, 322; on Heimdal, 158; numbers in, 162; on Yama, 304; Kāla in, 374

Rilke, Rainer Maria, quoted, 329

Rimbaud, Arthur, 343

Rishyasringa, 401

Rita, 265, 267, 318

Rivers of earth, 256

Rivers of heaven, 188-189, 195, 196; as time, 201; and Eridanus, 256-257

Robert le Diable, 279

Rohini, wain of, 398

Romance of Alexander, The, 51, 339

Rome, 339

Roscher, W. H., 286

Ross, W. D., 4

Rouen, Ettienne de, 418

Rouse, W. H. D., 255

Rudra, 365

Rumia, 437

Russell, Bertrand, v

Russia, 223; story of Kjolyvanovic in, 115; and wood of the Cross, 227; on end of the world, 384; mythical trees in, 447

Rustam, 43

Rydberg, Viktor, 92, 139, 141, 155, 362, 363; on Heimdal, 158, 159; on Hvergelmer, 208; on Yggdrasil, 233-234

Sagittarius, 239, 244, 261, 296, 321; Centaur, 424

Sahagún, 321

St. Francis, 334

St. Helena, 224

Saitan, 392

Salonen, A., 411, 439

Salt-mill, 366

Sampo, the, 98, 205, 221; building of, 98-102, 128; stealing of, 104-107; breaking of, 108, 146; meaning of, 111, 121; and Samson, 176; etymology of, 232; roots of, 133

Sampsä Pettervoinen, 115, 446

Samson, 388, 389; story of in Book of Judges, 165, 167, 173; characteristics of, 166-167; and Mars, 176; identity of, 177-178

Samson Agonistes, 116, f65

Samson Kolyvanovic, 1

Sanskrit, 91, 139; etymology of Sampo in, 232-233

Santiago, 226

Saptarshi, 301

Sarapis, Oracle of, 313-314

Satanael, 227

Satit, 321

Saturn, 194, 239, 268, 321, 373; Huang-ti as, 129; Egyptian, 29; of Lapps, 130; Kronos as, 133, 134-135, 283; Lord of Measures, 13-136; and the Golden Age, 146, 269 Lord of the Mill, 148; as originator of times, 153; in pre-Islamic tradition, 221; as earth-dweller, 222; and the cube, 222-223; conjunction of with Jupiter, 244, 268; Phaethon as, 265-268; as measurer, 271; reincarnations of, 418-419

Saturnalia, 222

Saud, 79

Saxo Grammaticus, 270; Gesta Danorum, 12; story of Amleth by, 12-18, 23-24, 174; later life of Hamlet, 20; on the wolf-horse, 32; on foster-sister, 34; parallels of Amlethus and Kai Khusrau, 37; division of story by, 82-83; Iceland as source for, 86-87

Saxton, Mark, 51n

Sayce, 420

Scaligeri, family of Verona, 279

Scandinavia, 225

Scherer, Anton, 357

Scheria, 316

Schlegel, Gustave, 135, 136n

Schmidt, Leopold, 280

Schmoekel, Hartmut, 420

Schott, A., 292n

Schröder, F. R., 162

Schroedinger, Erwin, 72

Science: origins of, v-vi; primitive, as art of fugue, 65; Tolstoi on, 329-330; archaic, 331; related to three-dimensional space, 342

Science fiction, as myth, 51

Scorpius, 244, 251, 261, 294, 295, 296, 450

Sea: references to, 35; mythical explanations of, 263. See also Ocean

Secular motion, 143

Selket-Serqet, 244, 295,409, 450

Serpent of Eden, 222

Servius, 195, 257

Setälä, E. N., 26, 34-35, 115

Seth, 430

Setna (Seton Chamwase), 113

Seven heavens, 123-124

Seven Sages, 301

Seven Sleepers of Ephesus, 299

Seven Stars of Ursa, 3

Shahnama, 36, 37-39, 50, 117

Shakespeare, William: contrasted with Saxo, 18-19; on the foster-sister theme, 34; on Mars and Saturn, 176

Shamanism, 121-132; analysis of, 121-122; seven heavens as ladder for, 124; drum as device of, 124-128; Siberian, 125; significance of blacksmith in, 128-130

Shamash-Helios, 290, 294-295, 297, 303

Shesha-Serpent, 79, 310

Shetland dialect, 91

Shiva, 236, 260

Shun, Emperor, 127-128

Shunashepa Hymns, 429

Siam, 127

Siduri, 209, 210, 294, 295, 412, 450

Signs, zodiacal, relation of constellations to, 144-145

Sigu, 217-218, 223; brown monkey of, 222

Sikander (Alexander the Great), 83, 84

Simana of Mekrijarvi, 111

Simmias, 180-186

Simrock, Karl, 357, 367, 378-379, 386

Sirius, 215, 239, 279, 284, 290, 320, 321, 357-358, 409, 429; Pan as, 285, 286; yew tree of, 447, 448

Siryenians, 26

Sivin, N., 128n

Siyawush, 37-39

Skadi, 170, 425

Skaldskaparmal, 24, 87

skambha, 227, 232, 233, 261, 306, 317; fire-sticks part of, 321

Skanda (Mars), 157

Slagfin the Musician, 155

Sleep and sleepers, 298-300, 418

Smintheus, Apollon, 364

Smith, Sidney, 443

Smiths: in shamanism, 128-130; as foster fathers of heroes, 371, 373

Snaebjörn, 24, 92, 139, 146, 363; identity of, 94; on the whirlpool, 205

Society, vs. culture, 71

Sociology, anthropological, 71

Socrates, 195, 210, 231, 246; in Phaedo, quoted, 179-186; on psychology, 190; on location of the world, 193; on Tartaros, 238

Soden, W. von, 120

Solon, 252, 253

Solstices, 62

Soma, the, 372, 429

Sophocles, 118, 421

Souls: created by the Demiurge, 306-307; journey of, 406-407

South America, 166; Indians of, 247

South Pole, celestial, 265, 417, 422; exempted from Precession, 269

Space: preceded by time, 65, 340-341; in modern world, 342

Speiser, E. A., 300, 402, 410, 412, 420; on Nebiru, 432

Spencer, Herbert, 70

Sravana, 236

Ssabians of Harran, 92

Stag, symbol for Kronos, 319, 320, 427

Stars: gods as, 177; fixed, 306-307

Stegemann, Viktor, 252

Stephanus of Byzantium, 266, 416

Stoics, 64

Stokes, W., 29n

Stonehenge, 68

Stone Things, identity of, 410-412

Strabo, 198, 254, 303

Ström, A. V., 386

Stucken, Eduard, 390, 401, 409

Sturluson, Snorri, 24, 86, 90; on Vafthrudnismal, 92; Gylfaginning, 156, 160, 163; on the Maelstrom, 205, 207-208; Gollancz on, 363; critics of, 365-366; on Heimdal, 387

Styx, 147n, 184, 188, 190, 209; in Dante, 194-195; in Homer, 198; in Hesiod, 199, 200; color of, 292; powers of water from, 422

Submarine life, 391

Sumer, 267, 284, 288, 324, 438-439 Sumerian (language), 120, 302, 314, 449

Sumo Indians, 243

Sun, position of, 59, 246

Sun (Chinese monkey), 270

Suomi, 108

Surt, “the Black,” 156-157, 161

Susa, 6

Susanowo, 168-172, 176, 292, 390, 425

Svarnara, 265

Symplegades, 318

Synchronicity, universal, 75

Syria, 214

Tafa’i, 291

Tahaki, 175, 426, 444-446

Tahiti, 291, 395

Taillte, Games of, 304

Talos, 178

Tamerlane, 335, 339

Tammuz, 91-92, 276, 281, 283, 448; identity of, 284-285

Tane, 223, 445

Tantalos, 280

Tapir, the, and the Milky Way, 246-247

Tarquin, King, 21-23; dream of, 37, 41

Tartaros, 183-185, 188, t94, 196, 199, 200, 238, 274

Taurus, 405; Age of, 125

Taylor, A. E., 187

Teiresias, 302

Telechines, 147n

Tell, William, 357

Tepictoton, 360

Testa, Domenico, 67

Teukros, 240, 256

Texcatlipoca, 247

Tezcatlipoca, 126, 136, 176, 261, 320, 322, 382, 405

Thamus, 275-277, 282, 348

Theaetetus, 190, 246

Theodoric, 335

Theodosius, Edict of, 341

Theogony, 199

Theseus, 172

Thetis, 272,422

Thidrek (Theodoric), 133

Thiersch, F., 397-398

Third Vatican Mythograther, 239

Thjassi/Volund, the Maker, 155

Thor, 160, 161, 163, 261, 54-355

Thot, 151, 282, 348

Thucydides, 331

Thunder, sons of, 225-226

Thureau-Dangin, F., 124

Tiamat, 153, 261, 262

Tiberius, 275-277, 341

Tides, relation of to whirlpools, 208

Tiki, 316

Timaeus, 187, 246, 252, 376; creation scheme in, 305-309; as myth and wisdom, 328, 331, 334, 396-397

Time: as measure, 8; as dimension of heaven, 44; relation of to myth, 47; space preceded by, 65; rivers of heaven as, 201; and Saturn, 269; and timelessness, 270; biological vs. of mankind, 327-328; cyclic, 332; vs. space, 340-342

Time machine, 154, 307; and Precession of Equinoxes, 143-144

Timon, 231

Titanus, 153, 274

Tlaloc, 290

Tolkien, J. R. R., 52

Tolstoy, Leo, 329-330

Tombs, study of, 303-304

Tonga, 204

Toscanelli, Paolo, 339

Tragedies, Greek, 117-118 Translation, problems of, 72

Trees, mythological, 223, 227, 247, 317; in epic of Gilgamesh, 437-450; in India, 444; in Tuamotua, 444-446; in Mexico, 446; in Finland, 446-447; significance of, 448-450

Trigon of Great Conjunctions, 268

Triptolemus, 116

Troy, 163, 336, 385

True Cross, 224

Tsham-Pas, 392

Tuamotu islands, 299, 444

Tungus, the, 247

Tupi, the, 166, 247

Tupi-Guarani, the, 247

Turan, 37

Turanians, 78, 80

Turkestan, 235

Turks, 371

Tursum Beg, 339-340

Turtle, in Greek myth, 369

Turu, 246

Tvashtri, 372, 393

Twilight of the Gods, 141, 163; Ragnarok, 156

Tycho, 228

Typhon, 249

Tyrol, 277, 280

Uemac, 360

Ugro-Finnish languages, 26

Uhland, Ludwig, 355, 357

Uller, 447

Ulysses, 197, 336-337; and the whirlpool, 204

Umbilicus Maris, 238

Underworld, the, 267; sequence in rulers of, 448. See also Hades

Ungnad, Arthur, 420, 435

Universality of doctrines, 6-7

Untamo, 27-30, 430

Ural-Altaic Asia, center of shamanism, 121, 123

Urd, 234

Ursa Major, 247, 260, 264, 384, 405; seven oxen of, 138; on shield of Achilles, 385

Ursa Minor, 429

Urshanabi, 295, 296, 300, 411, 417; son-in-law of Enki-Ea, 301; comparative individuals to, 430

Uruk, 288, 290, 300-301, 440; meaning of, 304

Urvashi, 291

Usener, Hermann, 326

Utnapishtim, 209, 214, 219, 293, 295, 296; ark of, 221, 435; story of Deluge by, 297-298; and Gilgamesh, 298-301

Utopia, 51n

Uzumue, 425

Vadava-mukha, 394

Vafthrudnismal, 366-367, 378; Snorri on, 92

Vainamoinen, 97, 98-99, 115, 128, 141, 206, 210, 216, 228, 447; in belly of ogre, 103-104; and stealing of the Sampo, 104-107; and Kantele, 108, 109, 369; departure of, 110-111; contest of with Youkahainen, 113; and Kullervo, 114-115; as shaman, 129

Vaisvānara, an Agni, 429

Vajda, Laszlo, 121

Valens, 256

Valerius Maximus, 21, 23

Valéry, Paul, quoted, 56, 344

Valhalla, 7, 162

Vall, 161

van der Waerden, B. L., 211, 401, 436

Vanir, the, 155, 160

Varahamihira, 65-66, 398

Varuna, 263, 264, 265

Vasishtha. 264, 392

Vedas, 7, 335, 345-346, 374, 393

Vega, 261-262

Venus (planet), 74, 216, 239. 261, 290, 355

Vézelay, 261

Vidal, 160, 161

Vigfusson, 94, 139, 156n

Vindler (Heimdal), 159

Vipunen, 103-104

Virchow, Rudolf, 71

Virgil, 59-60, 62, 164, 176, 296, 336, 424; supposed prophecy of, 114, 244-245; Georgics, 167, 258; quoted, 192; as Dante’s guide, 192-198; on Lethe, 407

Virgo, 245, 248-249

Vishnu, 78-79, 82, 259-260, 383; Krishna in, 309; and horse’s head, 393, 394

Vishvāmitra, 236

Voguls, 26, 130; on the Milky Way, 247

Voltaire, Francois Marie Arouet, 334

Völuspa, 141, 160

von Hammer, 339

von Soden, 433

Vortex, 111

Votyaks, 26

Vrihaspati, 372

Vurukasha Lake, 40, 215, 217, 265

Wagner, Richard, 156

Wainwright, G. A., 405

Waralden olmay, 130

Warner, Arthur, 36n, 83, 84

Warner, Edward, 36n, 83, 84

Wars of Alexander, The, 20-21

Water, origin of, 223

Way-openers, cosmological relevance of, 318

Weber, A., 428

Weidner, Ernst, 307, 403, 436

Weil, Simone, 329, 330, 331

Wells, stones thrown in , 423, 426

Werewolves, 278

West Africans, 7

Westphalia, 249

West Sudan, 126, 249,430

Whakatu, 174

Wheeler, Post, 169

Whirlpool, 90-91, 320; universality of, 204-205; in Homer, 2 ; among the Norse, 205; in Adam of Bremen, 206; among the Cherokee, 207; in Snorri, 207-208; in the sky, 210-212; summary of information on, 238-239; as ecliptic world, 40; Eridanus as, 258. See also Grotte.

White, Lynn, 388

Whitehead, Alfred North, 64

Whitney, W. D., 233, 374

Wild Hunter, the, 249, 292

Wilson, H. H., 260

Wiseman, D. J., 411

Wissowa, 326

Woehler, Friedrich, viii

Wolves, 278-279

World-Observer, 130

Wright, Austin, 51n

Xerxes, 84

Xolotl, 93

Yakuts, the, 128, 130, 247

Yama, 50, 146, 304, 360, 373. See also Yima

Yama Agastya, 319

Year, varying lengths of, 428

Yggdrasil, the World Ash, 223, 133, 447

Yima (jamshyd), 40, 41, 146, 153, 283, 448. See also Yama

Yima-ssaeta, 146

Ymer, 92

Youkahainen, 113

Yü the Great, 128, 129, 270

Yucatán, 247

Yudhishthira, 76-77, 79, 85, 309

Zaehner,R. C., 376

Zahan, D., 60

Zahhak, 84

Zal, 43

zalos, 258

Zebedee, 225, 226

Zend Avesta, 36

Zenker, R., 37

Zeus, 222, 259, 263, 267, 437; and fall of Hephaistos, 272-273; and Lykaon, 278-279; and Kronos, 280, 299,424

Zeus the Miller, 116

Ziggurat, the, 123

Zipacna, 175, 390

Zodiac, 186-187; true center of action, 60; “signs” of, 144

Zohar, 396

Zonaras, 23

Zoroaster, 84, 376

Zu-bird, 440, 443

Zurvan akarana, 129, 189, 374, 376