Part 28 (1/2)

[343: A. B. Cook, ”Zeus,” Vol. I, p. 244.]

[344: _Journal of the Manchester Egyptian and Oriental Society_, 1916.]

[345: ”The Influence of Egyptian Civilization in the East and in America,” _Bulletin of the John Rylands Library_, 1916.]

[346: Evans's, Fig. 41, p. 63.]

[347: ”The Seal Cylinders of Western Asia,” 1910.]

[348: Paribeni, ”Monumenti antichi dell'accademia dei Lincei,” XIX, punt. 1, pll. 1-3; and V. Duhn, ”Arch. f. Religionswissensch.,” XII, p.

161, pll. 2-4; quoted by Blinkenberg, ”The Thunder Weapon,” pp. 20 and 21, Fig. 9.]

[349: Without just reason, many writers have a.s.sumed that the pestle, which was identified with the handle used in the churning of the ocean (see de Gubernatis, ”Zoological Mythology,” Vol II, p. 361), was a phallic emblem. This meaning may have been given to the handle of the churn at a later period, when the churn itself was regarded as the Mother Pot or uterus; but we are not justified in a.s.suming that this was its primary significance.]

[350: Gladys M. N. Davis, ”The Asiatic Dionysos,” p. 172.]

[351: The tortoise was the vehicle of Aphrodite also and her representatives in Central America.]

[352: Jackson, ”Sh.e.l.ls, etc.,” pp. 57 _et seq._]

[353: _Vide supra_, p. 158.]

[354: Rendel Harris, ”The Ascent of Olympus,” p. 80. In the building up of the idea of rebirth the ancients kept constantly before their minds a very concrete picture of the actual process of parturition and of the anatomy of the organs concerned in this physiological process. This is not the place to enter into a discussion of the anatomical facts represented in the symbolism of the ”giver of life” presiding over the portal and the ”two hills” which are divided at the birth of the deity: but the real significance of the primitive imagery cannot be wholly ignored if we want to understand the meaning of the phraseology used by the ancient writers.]

[355: Blinkenberg, ”The Thunder-weapon,” p. 72.]

[356: Aylward M. Blackman, ”Sacramental Ideas and Usages in Ancient Egypt,” _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology_, March, 1918, p. 64.]

[357: _Op. cit._, p. 60.]

[358: ”Archaeol. Survey of Egypt,” 5th Memoir, 1896, p. 31.]

[359: See especially _op. cit._, p. 35, the G.o.ddess of streams and marshes, who was also herself ”the mother plant,” like the mother of Horus.]

[360: Whose cultural a.s.sociations with the Great Mother in the Eastern Mediterranean littoral has been discussed by Sir Arthur Evans, ”Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult,” pp. 49 _et seq._ Compare also _Apollo hyakinthos_ as further evidence of the link with Artemis.]

[361: P. J. Veth, ”Internat. Arch. f. Ethnol.,” Bd. 7, pp. 203 and 204.]

[362: ”Hieroglyphics,” p. 60.]

[363: Budge, ”The G.o.ds of the Egyptians,” Vol. I, pp. 436 and 437.]

[364: Alan Gardiner, ”Life and Death (Egyptian),” Hastings'

_Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics_.]

The Mandrake.

We have now given reasons for believing that the personification of the mandrake was in some way brought about by the transference to the plant of the magical virtues that originally belonged to the cowry sh.e.l.l.

The problem that still awaits solution is the nature of the process by which the transference was effected.