relations to himself. In technical language it
may be defined as _the apperception of man and nature under synthetic
conceptions_.[156-1]

This primitive form undergoes numerous changes, to trace and illustrate
which, has been the special task assumed by the many recent writers on
mythology. In some instances these changes are owing to the blending of
the myth with traditions of facts, forming a quasi-historical narrative,
the _saga;_ in others, elaborated by a poetic fancy and enriched by the
imagination, it becomes a fairy tale, the _maerchen_. Again, the myth
being a product of creative thought, existing in words only, as language
changes, it alters through forgetfulness of the earlier meanings of
words, through similarities in sounds deceiving the ear, or through a
confusion of the literal with the metaphorical signification of the same
word. The character of languages also favors or retards such changes,
pliable and easily modified ones, such as those of the American Indians,
and in a less degree those of the Aryan nations, favoring a developed
mythology, while rigid and monosyllabic ones, as the Chinese and Semitic
types, offer fewer facilities to such variations. Furthermore, tribal or
national history, the peculiar difficulties which retard the growth of
a community, and the geographical and climatic character of its
surroundings, give prominence to certain features in its mythology, and
to the absence of others. Myths originally diverse are blended, either
unconsciously, as that of the Roman Saturn with the Greek Cronus; or
consciously, as when the medieval missionaries transferred the deeds of
the German gods to Christian saints. Lastly, the prevailing temperament
of a nation, its psychology, gives a strong color to its mythical
conceptions, and imprints upon them the national peculiarities.

The judicious student of mythology must carefully weigh all these
formative agents, and assign each its value. They are all present in
every mythology, but in varying force. His object is accomplished when
he can point out the causal relation between the various features of a
myth and these governing agencies.

Such is the science of mythology. The philosophy of mythology undertakes
to set forth the unities of form which exist in various myths, and
putting aside whatever of this uniformity is explainable historically,
proposes to illustrate from what remains the intellectual need myths
were unconsciously framed to grat