nnibals!] But 'we are the victims of a great
illusion if we think that a mere comparison of a Maori and Greek myth
explains the myth.' I only profess to explain the savagery of the myth
by the fact (admitted) that it was composed by savages. The Maori story
'is a myth of the creation of light.' I, for my part, say, 'It is a myth
of the severance of heaven and earth.' {32a} And so it is! No Being
said, in Maori, 'Fiat lux!' Light is not here _created_. Heaven lay
flat on Earth, all was dark, somebody kicked Heaven up, the already
existing light came in. Here is no creation de la lumiere. I ask
Professor Tiele, 'Do you, sir, create light when you open your window-
shutters in the morning? No, you let light in!' The Maori tale is also
'un mythe primitif de l'aurore,' a primitive dawn myth. Dawn, again!
Here I lose Professor Tiele.

'Has the myth of Cronos the same sense?' Probably not, as the Maori
story, to my mind, has not got it either. But Professor Tiele says, 'The
myth of Cronos has precisely the opposite sense.' {32b} What is the myth
of Cronos? Ouranos (Heaven) married Gaea (Earth). Ouranos 'hid his
children from the light in the _hollows_ of Earth' (Hesiod). So, too,
the New Zealand gods were hidden from light while Heaven (Rangi) lay flat
on Papa (Earth). The children 'were concealed between the _hollows_ of
their parent's breasts.' They did not like it, for they dwelt in
darkness. So Cronos took an iron sickle and mutilated Ouranos in such a
way, enfin, as to divorce him a thoro. 'Thus,' I say, 'were Heaven and
Earth practically divorced.' The Greek gods now came out of the hollows
where they had been, like the New Zealand gods, 'hidden from the light.'

Professor Tiele on Sunset Myths

No, says Professor Tiele, 'the story of Cronos has precisely the opposite
meaning.' The New Zealand myth is one of dawn, the Greek myth is one of
sunset. The mutilated part of poor Ouranos is le phallus du ciel, le
soleil, which falls into 'the Cosmic ocean,' and then, of course, all is
dark. Professor Tiele may be right here; I am indifferent. All that I
wanted to explain was the savage complexion of the myth, and Professor
Tiele says that I have explained that, and (xii. 264) he rejects the
etymological theory of Mr. Max Muller.

I say that, in my opinion, the second part of the Cronos myth (the child-
swallowing performances of Cronos) 'was probably a world-wide Marchen, or
tale, attracted