Evolution of Theolof/ij. 241 



nities wliicli have reached tlie mythological stage proper, 

 allow no such confusion in respect to the attributes and 

 offices of their various deities. No Greek would ever have 

 sacrificed to Neptune for success in agriculture, nor to Ceres 

 for success in trade. The gods of the Assyrian, Babylonian, 

 Greek and Konian pantheons have generally each their 

 assigned rank and prerogatives. I say generally, for any 

 student of these complicated mythologies kncnvs that there 

 is, in many instances, a duplication of attributes, especially 

 among the so-called Olympic deities of Greece, and, though 

 to a less extent, among the greater gods of the Koman sys- 

 tem. But considering all these mythologies, each in its 

 entirety, the principle holds good. To what extent this 

 differentiation has been carried is best illustrated by the 

 elaborate and complex mythology of the Hesiodic Theogony. 

 We have no space, nor is it the purpose here, to go into 

 any detailed account of mythological systems. We have 

 seen that they rest upon a wider generalization, and that 

 by the working of a yet undisciplined Reason through the 

 imagination, the myth is their special feature. We have 

 to note, however, one other feature, and that is the separa- 

 tion, in the myth-system, of the personality of the god from 

 the object with which the fetish-Avorshiper's mind identified 

 him. Mythology conceives its gods as controlling the powers 

 and phenomena of Nature, but as distinct from these in 

 their personality. Zeus is not the thunderbolt itself, nor 

 in, nor of it, but as distinct therefrom, in his own individu- 

 ality, as Minos or Hercules ; and the separation is still more 

 marked in the Roman system. This, peculiarity depends 

 upon the rise in man of the idea of mind as distinct from 

 body. The development of theistic ideas keeps even pace 

 with the mental development of the nation. With advancing 

 intelligence, arises the consciousness of mind and thought 

 conceived as existing apart from mere Ixxlily functions. 

 This conception, as we have stated, primitive and savage 

 races do not grasp. Upon this distinction, when once fully 

 established, is based the idea of the Self, viz., the essential 

 personality of mind. The modifications of theism ' corre- 

 spond. The gods become active intelligences, superhuman 

 in faculty. The dominant gods become incarnations of the 

 most powerful and controlling sentiments and ideals evolved 

 by the national life, and in this transition we pass from the 

 fetish-gods of mere l)nit('-torc(; to the deities of mind, and 



