th

VII RT, Kyoto June 6-8

CREATION MYTHS

by
Michael Witzel

Summary
This paper deals with the comparison of ancient and modern mythological
cycles, even with that of the complete mythologies of tribes and peoples and aims at
establishing an underlying pattern that is found in most of Eurasia and in the pre-
Columbian Americas (Laurasia). It is characterized by a unique story line, from the
emergence of the world and of humans to an eventual destruction and a hoped-for
new world. Here, the various types of myths dealing with the primordial emergence
of the universe and the world are presented and discussed, which leads to the
discovery of the mythologies present at the time of the first human migration Out of
Africa -- and before that.

§ 1. Introduction

Myths all over the globe exhibit certain similarities that have attracted the attention of
scholars for some hundred and fifty years. There are several ways to explain such
similarities that will be explored below as far a creation myths are concerned or, rather,
myths about the emergence of the world.
A brief definition of myth may run like this: Myths are highly regarded, more
or less standardized, non-secular tales dealing with questions of the origin, nature and
ultimate destiny of the world and its human beings, including those of their societies,
rituals and festivals. There have been many other formulations; however, a very
comprehensive and useful definition has recently been given by W. van Binsbergen.1

1 Paper at the Conference 'Myth and the disciplines' held at Leiden, Dec.12, 2003, see:
http://www.shikanda.net/ancient_models/leopard/leopardwww.htm, cf.
http://www.shikanda.net/topicalities/kyoto/kyoto.htm. According to him, a myth is
* a narrative (told or recited at certain special occasions)
* that is standardised (to some extent)
* that is collectively owned and managed (often by specialists)
* that is considered by its owners to be of great and enduring significance
* that (whether or not these owners are consciously aware of this point) contains and brings out such
images of the world (a cosmology), of past and present society (a history and sociology) and of the
human conditions (an anthropology) as are eminently constitutive of the life society in which that
narrative circulates, or at least: circulated originally.
* To this we may add that, if this constitutive aspect is consciously realized by the owners, the narrative
may be invoked (aetiologically) to explain and justify present-day conditions)
 Although myths have been studied for a long time, ever since the Ancient
Greeks, Indians and Chinese, and in modern Europe for at least the past 330 years,2
even comparative studies of myths have not yet yielded a cogent system of
relationships.3

Previous interpretations have usually been restricted to one myth, or variants

of it. If similarities between some myths in various cultures have been noticed they were
explained in various fashions, the two most current ones being those of diffusion and
of archetypes.
Diffusion entails that the similarities in widely distributed myths are due to a
gradual dispersion of such motifs from a known or reconstructed center.4 In most
cases, however, we can no longer follow the trail of the diffusion of such myths or
complexes of myths. Shamanism with its myth of the shaman's death, recomposition
of the body, ascent to the heavens, etc., is spread over a wide area, from Siberia to
Nepal and from Lapland to the Americas but we do not know how it spread and
when, or whether it really was the predecessor of certain mythologies and religions now
existing in Eurasia. The same holds for individual myths such as the Orpheus myth
which is found in Greece, Japan, N. America, etc.5
The other currently common theory that aims at explaining such similarities is
based on C.G. Jung's psychology. According to his explanation (followed by J.
Campbell and others), certain motifs, or their composite parts, the archetypes, are
universally human. The image of the Mother/mother deity, the Goddess, is supposed
to be one such archetype. Since archetypes are universal, they can appear in dreams,
visions and myths, and are supposed to re-emerge even in areas where they have
traditionally not been prominent, such as in certain European societies.6 However, if
this were correct, we would expect that such motifs or archetypes would indeed turn
up in all parts of the globe. This, however, is not the case.

§ 2. The Laurasian Theory

In order to substantiate this view, we will have to take another look at

comparative mythology in a wholly new way. This is not done in the old Frazerian way,

* and that therefore is a powerful device to create collectively underpinned meaning and collectively
recognised truth (regardless of whether such truth would be recognised outside the community whose
myth it is).
2 See Feldman, Burton and Robert D. Richardson 1972; and cf. Kazuo Matsumura 2005.
3 There is a long list of interpretations of myth, from the antique and Renaissance stance (Vico)
regarding them as allegorical or euhemeristic, from Max Müller's disguised nature myths to astral
mythology, from ritual to Malinowski's social charter, from Freud's theories of repression to Jung's
universal psychic archetypes, from myth as disguised history to Lévi-Strauss' binary, structural
analysis supposedly reflecting the structure of the human mind.
4 Well attested cases, howeveer, are those of Judaeo-Christian, Islamic or Buddhist myths, which have
swept large parts of the globe well before the age of European discovery, travels and colonialization.
5 The spread of such myths has been studied especially by Stith Thompson and his school.
6 Conveniently forgetting about the pre-Protestant image and worship of Mary, mother of Christ, which
is mythologically very complex: Mary as mother, immaculate virgin, ruler of the world, and as a sort of
heavenly bride, -- all under the guise of a very important Christian saint.
certainly not in the manner of the diffusionists such as Frobenius and Baumann, nor
with the Indo-European-centered method of Dumézil, not to mention the various
psychological approaches of Jung, Campbell, and others, or the structuralism of Lévy-
Strauss and his followers. Instead, the approach proposed here reminds of the 19th
century historical and comparative method. The present proposal and methodology7
has recently, but unwittingly, been called "essentially romantic"8 as it looks for, and
points toward, a common source, that certainly "may no longer exist," as W. Jones put it
with regard to the Proto-Indo-European parent language.
In doing so, I do not compare randomly, from mythologies all over the world,
but only those mythologies that follow a certain narrational scheme. This schema
encompasses, in succession, the ultimate of origins of the universe and the world, the
subsequent generations of the gods, an age of semi-divine heroes, the emergence of
humans, and the origins of noble or "royal" lineages. It frequently includes a violent
end to our present world, sometimes with the hope for a new world emerging out of
the ashes. Ultimately, the universe is seen as a living body, in analogy to the human
one: it is born from primordial incest, grows, develops, comes of age, and has to
undergo final decay and death.
The problem with the earlier types of explanations of myth proposed so far9 is
that they fail to address the central, but generally unnoticed problem: the
comparability of whole systems of myths; or, to use a linguistic simile, the comparison of
whole grammars, not just of a particular word, form, declension/conjugation or
syntactical feature. When comparing whole systems of myths it can then be noticed --
though this has not been done so far-- that whole mythologies, such as the Vedic
Indian or Japanese one, do not only have similar contents (individual myths with
similar motifs/archetypes) but that these items are also arranged in similar fashion.
Indeed, a fairly large number of these mythologies exhibit a common story line.
The currently fashionable explanations in terms of general human universals
cannot explain the extraordinary amount of similarities and congruities, whether they
suppose binary structures of arrangement of mythological items (Lévi-Strauss), or
psychic archetypes (Jung, Campbell), or of diffusion (Baumann, Stith Thompson).

7 See Witzel, MT VI, 2001, EJVS 12-1 (2005) and the talk: Out of Africa: The journey of the oldest tales
of humankind, given at the Conference on Generalized Sciences (Peaceful World and enriching Lives),
Tokyo March 17, 2005 as well as my forthcoming book on comparative mythology, Origins (working
title).
8 As W. Doniger chose to call it in The New York Times Book Review (July 14, 1991: 3, 26): "Given
cultural convergences the theoretically possible explanations are: (a) diffusion, (b) derivation from a
common source (c) derivation from structural characteristics of the human mind. [Ginsburg] rejects
the idea of a common source because he rejects a model which is Romantic even before it is positivist:
that of the genealogical tree." However it is precisely this model that has been successfully used by
comparative historical linguistics, palaeontology, and --visible in popular accounts since the Fall of
1990-- in the very influential genetic studies (cf. Witzel 2001). Incidentally, in her review, Doniger had
many of the facts in hand that would have allowed her to observe the opposition between Eurasian
(Laurasian) and sub-Saharan African (Gondwana) mythology detailed in this paper, but due to the
engrained 'path dependencies' of the psychological interpretation, from Freud onwards, she failed to draw
the obvious conclusions discussed in this and earlier papers. Recent advances in human genetics lend
additional support to this scenario; such results (especially the early, Paleolithic emigration from Africa
along the coasts of the Indian/W. Pacific oceans) will be dealt with separately.
9 See W. Doty, Mythography (1986).
For, these congruities are found in large areas of the world, but they are not found on
all continents nor are they evenly distributed.
The new comparative approach proposed here has been developed over the
past decade or so.10 The steps undertaken include, first, to look at the common (story
line) features, then to take account of the whole extent and structure of the various
local mythologies, and finally to reconstruct a coherent mythology for much of
Eurasia, North Africa and the Americas. Its designation, Laurasian Mythology, is
derived from the geographical term, Lauretania, in Canada, and that of Eurasia.
This new approach and the steps taken are in fact similar to the well tested
methods of historical linguistics. First, a general reconstruction of the complete
mythological structure is made, based on a number of obvious similarities. This
structure is characterized by a narrational scheme that encompasses, in succession, the
ultimate of origins of the universe and the world, the subsequent generations of the
gods, an age of semi-divine heroes, the emergence of humans, the origins of "royal"
lineages. It frequently includes a violent end to our present world, sometimes with the
hope for a new world emerging out of the ashes. Ultimately, the universe is seen as a
living body, in analogy to the human one: it is born from primordial incest, grows,
develops, comes of age, and has to undergo final decay and death.

In passing it might be mentioned that some of the mythological comparisons

seem to overlap even with linguistic ones. For example, in the mythologies of old Japan
(Kojiki) and earliest India (
gveda), the male deity who opens the primordial cave is
described or even named by the same semantic terms, though linguistically unrelated,
i.e., 'arm-strong' (O. Japanese Ta-jikara, Vedic Skt. tuvi-gråbha, ugra-båhu [Indra]); in
both mythologies the deities of fire are male, and those of water are female.11
To the Laurasian mythologies belong the ones of the Uralic, Altaic, Japanese,
Indo-European, and Austric (S.E. Asian and Polynesian) speaking populations as well
those of the old Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Chinese peoples. The American Indian
mythologies (Athabascan, Navajo, Algonkin, Aztec, Maya, Inca, Amazon, Tierra del
Fuego, etc.) are closely related as well.

Once the main outline and geographical extent of Laurasian mythology have
been established, we can proceed in several further ways:
(1) noting the ''regional'' (sub-)varieties, for example the Indo-European one

10 See Witzel 2001 (MT VI, 2001, 45- 62).

11 See Witzel, Vala and Iwato (EJVS 12-1. 2005, 1-69). It must be stressed that Japanese myth (in its
recorded form, of 712 CE, going back at least to first half of the first millennium CE) has no direct or
indirect connections with (Vedic) India (1500-500 BCE) before the introduction of Buddhism around
500 CE. An explanation must be sought elsewhere (see EJVS 12) .-- Many other incidental, isolated,
unexpected details and (poetic) motifs could be adduced, such as that of the Vedic Indian fire god,
Måtari-śvan 'growing inside the mother', and the archaic Japanese fire god Ho-musubi 'growing (as) fire
(inside his mother)', who at his birth burned his mother Izanami so severely that she died. Or, there are
such isolated motifs as that of the Vedic deity Uas exposing her breasts as greeting to her close friends
(the poets), a feature also found in the unrelated Siberian Amur region (among the Gilyaks); or, Father
Heaven and Mother Earth are called with the little understood term Rodasī in Vedic , which term is well
explained by the Polynesian (Maori) myth that lets Heaven cry (as rain) about his forced separation
from Earth, a motif found in the Vedas, too. Rodasī thus is derived from rud 'to cry': *rodas 'crying, face',
rodasī 'the two cryings', i.e., with elliptical dual, that of Heaven and the other one (Earth).
 or the Near Eastern myth families,12
(2) exploring their historical development by setting up a family tree of such
(sub-)groupings,13
(3) concentrating on individual mythologies and exploring in how far they
represent the reconstructed Laurasian type, what they miss and what can be
reconstructed by internal comparison; further, delineating the influence from
the surrounding areas, and by contrast, some purely local developments.
Such internal reconstruction will fill the gap between, say, the reconstructed Near
Eastern branch and the individual local mythology, e.g. that of the Sumerians or
Hurrites.
Even though this is a large scale project, possible only with the help of many
specialists in the fields of individual cultures, the project cannot stop here. Instead,
initial exploration, carried out over the past few years, has indicated that Laurasian
mythology, though covering very large parts of the globe, is not the only one in
existence, and that it is not isolated among the several other existing types.
However, let us first look at the underpinnings of Laurasian mythology in some detail.
Since the present symposium takes place in Japan, I select a few topics from the Kojiki
and Nihon Shoki.

§ 3 Creation Myths

Before there was any light there was only

darkness, all was night. Before there was
even darkness there was nothing. ... It is
said in the karakia, at the beginning of time
there stood Te Kore, the Nothingness.
Then was Te Po, the Night, which was
immensely long and immensely dark... The
first light that existed was no more than the
glowing of a worm, and when sun and
moon were made there were no eyes, there
was none to see them, not even kaitiaki.
The beginning was made from the
nothing.14

Tales about the beginning of the universe and the earth are the most prominent
features in Laurasian mythology. They constitute the very beginning of "mythic time."
The Laurasian stress on cosmogony, however, is entirely absent in Gondwana
mythologies.
Original creation is often shrouded in mystery. The eternal question about

12 Including their mutual interrelations, and mutual secondary influences upon each other.
13 Always keeping in mind that secondary influences may have changed the picture, as in the case of the
close cultural interaction of preclassical Ancient Greece / Anatolia / Syria-Palestine.
14 http://www.maori.org.nz/korero/?d=page&pid=sp37&parent=36
ultimate origins (Gaugains “Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We
Going?” (D'où venons nous? Que sommes nous? Où allons nous?) or Kant's both
theoretical and practical “drei Fragen: 1. Was kann ich wissen? 2. Was soll ich tun? 3.
Was darf ich hoffen?” (Kant [1781], 1956: 728) was answered by many Laurasian
peoples in a more or less similar way. Most of them agree that, in the beginning,
Heaven and Earth were created, however, they tell about the preceding stage of initial
emergence of the universe it in several, sometimes surprisingly diverse ways.
For example, in the oldest Indian text, the RV (c. 1500-1200 BCE), contains
several approaches to the question, made by its many poets. Many of them assume that
the world and humankind, have sprung out of "nothing," ("there was neither being
nor non-being"), or out of a great void or darkness, or out of a great, featureless salty
ocean.
However, if they speak of creator god(s), then these deities were neither present
from the beginning or even they originated from the primordial void/ocean. Thus,
Rigveda 10.129 asks whether the god(s) were in existence at the time of the first
creation or whether even they do not know about it as they came only later...
There also is the isolated idea of a primordial giant15 whose cut up body formed
the various parts of the universe. A slightly later text adds the idea of the shaky young
earth floating on the waters, and the mytheme of a diver animal that first had to bring
it up from the bottom of the sea: in India not a bird, as usual, but as a primordial boar,
the later boar incarnation of the great Hindu god Viu; finally, another early text
speaks of an egg16 with a golden germ.17
In sum, these mythemes constitute the aggregate of most topics found in the
various Laurasian mythologies. We thus do not only find various creation myths in the
many individual Laurasian mythologies but we even encounter several creation myths
within a single Laurasian mythology or creation story. The reasons for the multiple
creation myths escape immediate understanding.18 This may be seen as posing a
problem for the Laurasian theory. However, there are avenues to proceed beyond this
and reach the form of creation myths as they must have been present at the time of
early Laurasian mythology. The various major forms of cosmogony include the
following six prominent sets.19

15 RV 10. 90. For details see now Lincoln 1986.

16 10.121 : the golden germ.
17 See Bosch 1960.
18 It may be the case that even the Afro-Australian mythology had an original creation myth and that
this has been lost. This could be preserved in some accounts of the Afro-Australian mythology. However,
there is no trace of any such old Afro-Australian creation myth, as the earth is seen as eternal. Thus,
this possibility is very vague at best.
19 According to the numbering of motifs in Stith Thompson, Motif Index (1993) Motifs A800--A899.
The earth
A800--A839. Creation of the earth
A810. Primeval water
A820. Other means of creation of earth
A830. Creation of earth by creator
A840. Support of the earth
cf. Eliade 1967/1992 (Introduction), with a similar classification as the one given above (§2) and that by
by Witzel (2004, § 1, end); note also S. Thompson (1993), motifs A850. Changes in the earth; A870.
Nature and condition of the earth.
§ 3.1. Chaos

To begin with, there is a fairly widely spread, quite abstract notion of creation, or the
primordial emergence of the universe out of primordial darkness,20 chaos, or even
out of 'non-being' (Kuiper 1983); in some versions it is connected with primordial
waters, as can be seen below. We begin with the oldest attested versions, a practice to be
followed, wherever possible, throughout. As mentioned, the most abstract version,
chaos and 'non-being', can be found in India, in the Rigveda (c. 1200 BCE).
Interestingly, this version appears among the more "philosophical" and speculative
hymns, RV 10.129:
"Neither "being" (sat) nor "non-being" (asat) existed in the beginning, nor
space, nor heaven beyond it. What moved about? Where? In whose protection?
What was the deep water abyss? 21
Then, there was neither death nor immortality, nor an indication of day and
night. The One breathed, without wind, according to its own will; nothing else
than this existed beyond it.
In the beginning darkness was hidden in darkness. All of this (universe) was a
featureless salty ocean. The One, the germ, that was covered by emptiness, was
born through the might of its 'heat'.
Then, in the beginning, desire came about, which existed as the first seed of
mind. The wise poets, searching in their hearts, found the umbilical cord
(relationship) of being in non-being.
The cord is stretched out obliquely. Indeed, was there "above" or below" at all?
There were the ones who bestow seed, there were 'greatnesses.' Below was
(one's) own will, above was granting.
Who then knows, who will proclaim here, from where they have been born,
from where this wide emanation (visi) (has been born)? The gods are later
than the emanation (of the world); now, who knows from where it (the world)
came into existence?
This creation, from where it came into existence, whether he has made it or not,
the one who is the "overseer" in the highest heaven he alone knows it, -- (but
what) if he does not know? "22
The last verse is an addition, as a concept of a 'creator' (Prajåpati, 'lord of the
descendants, children, creatures') who emerged only in the late
gveda. The
mentioning of primeval desire is remarkable; we will again encounter it in Greece. In
old China, too, there is frequent mention of primordial waters, but also one of Chaos
or emptiness.
In a time when Heaven and Earth still were without form, was called the great
beginning. The dao began in the immense emptiness. ... Then 'breaths' were

20 Thompson (1993), motifs A605.1. Primeval darkness. S. Am. Indian (GuaranŠ): Métraux BBAE
CXLIII (3) 93; Hawaii: Beckwith Myth 312; Africa (Luba): Donohugh Africa V 180. Cf. A605.2.
Primeval cold. Icel.: Boberg.-- cf. also: A605. Primeval chaos. A115.3. Deity arises from mist. Hawaii:
Beckwith Myth 71. A115.4. Deity emerges from darkness of underworld. Mangia (Cook Is.): Beckwith
Myth 224. A115.6. Deity arises from shell of darkness where he has been for million ages. Tahiti: Henry.
21 Cf. Gargī's question (Bhad Ārayaka Upaniad 3.6): 'Since all this world, is woven, warp and woof,
on water, on what, then, is the water woven, warp and woof?'
22 Cf. Eliade 1977: 110.
 born from space and time. What was light moved and formed the sky (easily);
what was heavy, the earth... this process was difficult.23 (Huainan zi).24
A similar version is that of old Greek mythology: First there was chaos, in it Nyx (fem.,
'night') and Erebos (masc., her brother) were found; the force uniting them is love
(echoed by the Indian account of primordial desire). Erebos descends, and liberates
Nyx which spread and becomes the wide sphere; they separate like two parts of an
egg 25 and give birth to Eros (love), and to Heaven (Ouranos) and Earth (Gaia); Eros
binds these together closely. In Hesiod's Theogony this is told as follows.
First of all, the Void (Chaos) came into being, next broad-bosomed Earth, the
solid and eternal home of all and Eos (Desire), the most beautiful of all immortal
gods, ... Out of Void came Darkness and black Night, and out of Night came
Light and Day, her children conceived after union in love with Darkness. Earth
first produced the starry Sky,26 equal in size with herself, to cover her on all
sides...."27
In other versions, Earth is directly born from Chaos, emptiness, with help of Eros; or
Chaos gave birth to Night, which itself gave birth to Aether, the first brilliant light, the
purest fire, to Day. The Romans, heavily influenced by Greek literature and thought,
follow suit closely. In the poetry of Ovid's Metamorphoses
Before the ocean and the earth appeared--
before the skies had overspread them all--
the face of Nature in a vast expanse
was naught but Chaos uniformly waste...
Another Indo-European speaking people, the northern Germanic Icelanders, agree. In
old Norse mythology recorded in the Edda (c. 1177 CE), there was chaos at the time
of the beginning of the world, 'a yawning abyss' (gap var ginnunga, Völuspá 3). Then
the sea was created and Niflheim, the land of clouds and fogs in the north, as well as
Muspelsheim, the southern land of fire. Through the contact of ice from the north and
the warm breezes from the South, a first being, the primordial god Ymir, was created.28
Once there was the age when Ymir lived.
There was neither sand, nor sea, nor salty waves,
not was Earth found, not Upper Heaven, --
a yawning gap, and grass nowhere.
Until Bur's sons29 scooped up the lands,

23 Mathieu1989: 27. The Huainan zi is an early Taoist text, c.150 BC.

24 Or, in a more 'theistic' version: When the earth was covered with water, the heavenly Lord sent down
one of his subjects to prepare it (for habitation). He descended but found too many obstacles which let
him not succeed. The heavenly Lord sent another one... (who succeeded)." N. Matsumoto 1928: 116,
from: M.H. Maspero 1924: 65; cf. motif of mishap trials, below 1.4.1. and bible (birds sent out after the
flood).
25 See below § 3.3.
26 Note that the union of Gaia and Ouranos is as close as that reported in Polynesia of Rangi and Papa
which were forcibly separated by Toko. Even the 19th century researchers of Maori myths noticed that
they were very close to Classical European ones..
27 Cf. RV 10.90. 1-5, on the primordial giant and the earth or viråj.
28 Who was to be dismembered like the Indian purua.
29 The gods, such as Odin, Vili and VéI, or Hoenir and Lódurr (see Völuspa 18).
 they who created mighty Midgard.30
The sun from the south shone on the rocks
and from the ground green leeches greened.
I know an ash (tree), called Yggdrasil;31
white fog wets the high tree;
from there comes the dew which falls into the valleys,
evergreen it stands above Urd's32 spring. (Völuspa)
Far away from the Indo-Europeans, the Polynesians, an Austric speaking people who
originally had emerged from S. China and Taiwan, speak of primordial emptiness and
darkness. In the Maori version, negation or nothingness (kore) gives birth to chaos /
darkness (po) and this, to rangi "heaven, sky".33 (see above).
Io dwelt within the breathing space of immensity.
The Universe was in darkness, with water everywhere.
There was no glimmer of dawn, no clearness, no light.
And he began by saying these words -
That he might cease remaining inactive:
'Darkness become a light-possessing darkness.'
And at once light appeared...34
Then (he) looked to the waters which compassed him about, and spake a forth
time, saying:
'The waters of Tai-kama, be ye separate.
Heaven be formed.' Then the sky became suspended.
'Bring forth thou Tupua-horo-nuku.'
And at once the moving earth lay stretched abroad."

Normally, the descent of the gods is listed as: negation (kore) developing into -->
chaos / darkness (po) --> rangi "heaven, sky". The supreme deity Io, known only to
some specialized priests,35 escaped the western mythographers for quite some time, and
thus is not listed in the older accounts of the myths of New Zealand:36 "...unknown to
most Maoris.... cult was esoteric... ritual in the hands of the superior priesthood... no
form or sacrifice was made to Io, no image ever made.. [there was] no aria (form of

30 The earth of the human beings, other than Asgard (of the gods), and Muspelheim (the world of the
giants).
31 Literally, "Odin's horse"; Odin hung himself in its branches for nine days to get universal wisdom.
32 One of the three roots of Yggdrasil, the source of fate; also the Norns of the past.
33 See Tregear 1891: 391sq. .
34 The correspondence with the Bible (Genesis) and with Maya myth (Popol Vuh) is obvious; however,
the traditional style excludes Christian influence.
35 The similar secretive role played by the Maori deity Io (Tregear1891: 106) who is never mentioned to
outsiders and known only to a few initiated. The primordial god Io is the supreme being, ancestor of Io-
rangi and his son Tawhito-te-raki. However, even this genealogy is not uniform: The Moriori genealogy
differs: Tiki -> Uru -> Ngangana -> Io-> Io-rangi.
36 Eliade 1977: 14 sqq. sums up "...unknown to most Maoris.... cult was esoteric... ritual in the hands of
the superior priesthood... no form or sacrifice was made to Io, no image ever made.. no aria (form of
incarnation) such as inferior gods had..." (This view has recently been criticized by Marshall Sahlins).
incarnation) such as inferior gods had..."37 The Hawai'ian version that has undergone
some editing by powerful clans since c. 1700 CE, only has38
At the time when the light of the sun was subdued
To cause light to break forth
At the time of the night of Makalii (winter)
Then began the slime which established the earth,
The source of deeper darkness,
Of the depth of darkness, of the depth of darkness,
Of the darkness of the sun, in the depth of night,
It is night, so it was born...
However, the Tahiti version is more explicit. Here the creator is the god Ta'aroa
(Maori Tangaroa, Takaroa, Hawai'ian Kanaloa) who apparently existed before actual
creation. (Hawai'i, below, is the Tahitian and Hawai'ian name for *Sawaiki, the
mythical home island of all Polynesians).
He existed, Taaroa was his name,
In the immensity.
There was no earth, there was no sky,
There was no sea, there was no man.
Taaroa calls, but nothing answers.
Existing alone, he became the Universe.
Taaroa is the root, the rocks.
Taaroa is the sand.
It is thus that he is named.
Taaroa is the light. Taaroa is within.
Taaroa is the germ,. Taaroa is the support.
Taaroa is enduring. Taaroa is wise. He erected the land of Hawaii.
Hawaii the great and sacred,
As a body or shell for Taaroa.
The earth is moving.
O, Foundations, Rocks,
O sands, hither, hither,
Brought hither, pressed together the earth.
Press, press again. They do not unite.
Stretch out the seven heavens, let ignorance cease
Let immobility cease.
Let the period of messengers cease.

It is the time of the speaker.

Completed the foundations.
Completed the rocks.
Completed the sands.

37 Interestingly, such myths of primordial creation are absent in Hawaii, see Beckwith 1940, introd.:
Coming of the gods. The similarity between Japanese and Polynesians myths were already mentioned
by Aston 1896: 5 n.3 "...Personifications of highly abstract ideas are not unknown in myths of savages.
The South Sea Islanders have personified 'the very beginning' and 'space'. Lang's "Myth, religion and
ritual", I p.196.ò Cf. now Philippi 1990: 92 sq., on the primordial Japanese deities
Kamurogi/Kamuromi.
38 Kumulipo 1897.
incarnation) such as inferior gods had..."37 The Hawai'ian version that has undergone
some editing by powerful clans since c. 1700 CE, only has38
At the time when the light of the sun was subdued
To cause light to break forth
At the time of the night of Makalii (winter)
Then began the slime which established the earth,
The source of deeper darkness,
Of the depth of darkness, of the depth of darkness,
Of the darkness of the sun, in the depth of night,
It is night, so it was born...
However, the Tahiti version is more explicit. Here the creator is the god Ta'aroa
(Maori Tangaroa, Takaroa, Hawai'ian Kanaloa) who apparently existed before actual
creation. (Hawai'i, below, is the Tahitian and Hawai'ian name for *Sawaiki, the
mythical home island of all Polynesians).
He existed, Taaroa was his name,
In the immensity.
There was no earth, there was no sky,
There was no sea, there was no man.
Taaroa calls, but nothing answers.
Existing alone, he became the Universe.
Taaroa is the root, the rocks.
Taaroa is the sand.
It is thus that he is named.
Taaroa is the light. Taaroa is within.
Taaroa is the germ,. Taaroa is the support.
Taaroa is enduring. Taaroa is wise. He erected the land of Hawaii.
Hawaii the great and sacred,
As a body or shell for Taaroa.
The earth is moving.
O, Foundations, Rocks,
O sands, hither, hither,
Brought hither, pressed together the earth.
Press, press again. They do not unite.
Stretch out the seven heavens, let ignorance cease
Let immobility cease.
Let the period of messengers cease.

It is the time of the speaker.

Completed the foundations.
Completed the rocks.
Completed the sands.

37 Interestingly, such myths of primordial creation are absent in Hawaii, see Beckwith 1940, introd.:
Coming of the gods. The similarity between Japanese and Polynesians myths were already mentioned
by Aston 1896: 5 n.3 "...Personifications of highly abstract ideas are not unknown in myths of savages.
The South Sea Islanders have personified 'the very beginning' and 'space'. Lang's "Myth, religion and
ritual", I p.196.ò Cf. now Philippi 1990: 92 sq., on the primordial Japanese deities
Kamurogi/Kamuromi.
38 Kumulipo 1897.
 above the firmament: and it was so. (8) And God called the firmament Heaven.
And the evening and the morning were the second day.
(9) And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto
one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. (10) And God called the
dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God
saw that it was good.46

§ 3.2. Primordial waters

The idea of primeval waters is closely connected with that of primeval darkness or
chaos, and therefore has already come up several times in the preceding section: chaos
is often identified with a watery waste.47
In North Asia/North America and the Near East, the birth of the earth from
the waters seems to be the standard myth, transmitted in several versions, (often
involving the earth diver bird, see section 3.3.) The myth of primordial waters,
encountered already in some cases discussed above, is very widely spread, especially in
N. Europe,48 Siberia and the Americas,49 the Near East,50 India,51 S.E. Asia-Oceania.52
It is 'logically' linked to the myth of the Floating Earth (see § 3.3), as it provides the
background for bringing up the earth from the bottom of the primordial waters and
subsequently, the floating earth (§ 4.4). To begin with the older attestations, in India,
there is the frequently repeated and varied myth, usually summed up as "In the
beginning there was (only) salt water" (agre idam sarvam salilam åsīt); there are
similarly old accounts in Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Greek, and Chinese mythologies.
One of the oldest, the Mesopotamian version, is of interest it does not start from
an undifferentiated primordial ooze, rather from a union of salty (ocean) waters and
sweet (river) waters, which perfectly reflects the Iraqi marsh land situation well. From
the (female) waters Tiamat and (male) Apsu, two generations of ancestors of the sky
god Anu emerged: Tiamat (fem.), the primordial (sea) waters, and Apsu (male), the
primordial (fresh) waters, are found in the beginning. They give birth to Lahmu and
Lahamu who in turn give birth to Anšar and Kišar ("father of gods, king"). His son is
Anu (the sky god). Note again the role of speech.
"When on high the heaven had not been named,
firm ground below had not been called by name,

46 Cf. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/premo.html and http://www.sacred-

texts.com/wmn/wb/wb03.htm.
47 Thompson (1993) mytheme A810. Primeval water: In the beginning everything is covered with
water.-- Dh I 1--89 passim; Gaster Oldest Stories 69.
48 According to Thompson (1993), in Finnish: Kalevala rune 1; -- cf. Edda. Icel.: MacCulloch Eddic 325-
-26;-- Irish myth: Cross;
49According to Thompson (1993), in: Siberian: Holmberg Siberian 313ff.; --S. Am. Indian (Guarayu):
Métraux BBAE CXLIII (3) 437.--N. A. Indian: Thompson Tales 279 n. 29, Alexander N. Am 260
(Haida), (Calif.): Gayton and Newman 53; Mixtec: Alexander Lat. Am. 86; Quiché: ibid. 160.
50 According to Thompson (1993), in: Egyptian: Mąller 48; Babylonian: Spence 71; Jewish: Neuman.
51 According to Thompson (1993), in: Buddhist myth: Malalasekera II 786; India: Thompson-Balys.
52 According to Thompson (1993), in: Batak: Voorhoeve Oversicht 63ff.; Dixon 157 (Minahassa), 158f.
(Borneo), 248f.; -- Marquesas: Handy 122; Marshall Is.: Davenport 221; Oceanic: Dixon 8 n. 7 (Maori),
18f. (Samoa), 20 (Society Is., Tonga), 105 (Admiralty Is., Polynesia, Indonesia, Micronesia), (Marshall
Is., Yap)
 naught but primordial Apsu, their begetter,
(and) Mummu-Tiamat, she who bore them all,
their waters commingling as a single body; ....
Then it was that the gods were formed within them.
Lahmu and Lahamu were brought forth, by name they were called.
For aeons they grew in age and in stature.
Anshar and Kishar were formed, surpassing the others.
They prolonged the days, added on the years.
Anu was their son..."53
Old Egyptian mythology has four basic versions54 of the creation myths, formulated in
old religious centers that became large temple cities. The mythology of Heliopolis (5th
dynasty) is the most 'orthodox' then there is that of Memphis, the capital of united
Egypt; that of Hermopolis, itself with four variants; and that of Thebes, the capital of
the New Kingdom (1570-1085 BC).
The beginning, the time of the gods is called "First Time", a golden age when
the gods lived on earth55 and justice reigned. The universe was just a vast ocean (Nun)
with no surface, and was compared to an egg.56 It is typical for Egyptian myth that the
earth arose out of these waters in form of a hill,57 similar to what may be seen in the
floating earth (section 3.3) that was fixed to the bottom of the ocean. According to the
Heliopolis myth, the bisexual god Atum, "the complete one,"58 the god of Heliopolis,
created himself by his own will, or he was thought to be in fact a child of Nun, the
primordial waters, who is the self-created father of the gods. As there was no place to
stand on, Atum created a hill at the place of his first appearance (and he is sometimes
regarded as the hill itself). He sat on it59 as it arose out of the waters of chaos (Nun)
and brought the first gods into being.60
The Lord of All, after having come into being, says: I am who came into being as
Khepri ("the becoming one"). When I came into being, the beings became into
being, all the beings came into being after I became. Numerous are those who
became, who came out of my mouth, before heaven existed, nor earth came into
being.... I being in weariness was bound to them in the Watery Abyss. I found
no place to stand. I thought in my heart, I planned myself, I made all forms
being alone, before I ejected Shu, before I spat out Tefnut...61

53 Eliade 1977: 98.

54 Ions 1990.
55 Similar to the early beginnings of the world in the Veda, when the gods in the beginning first must
rise to heaven themselves.
56 Ions, 1990: 22.
57 Claimed by each of the prominent four religious centers, Heliopolis etc, as their own central place, see
rd
Ions 1990: 22 - The first pyramids (such as the step pyramid at Saqqara, built by Djoser of the 3 dyn. ),
were in this shape.
58 In the Pyramid texts he is already identified with the sun god Ra. Cf. the name of the Japanese god.
Omo-daru.no kami, "Face / surface-complete Deity" (Deity perfect exterior) Kojiki 1.2.
59 Found in any Egyptian city. On the primordial hill in Egypt, etc.; see also John Irwin, The sacred
Anthill and the Cult of the Primordial Mound, History of Religions, 22.2, 339-360; cf. Kuiper 1983,
introduction.
60 By naming the parts of his body: is this like the primordial purua/Ymir?
61 Eliade 1977: 96; -- note the African trend of letting the earth been created from the spittle/vomit of the
In another version, creation took place in the primordial waters (that is, the male Nun,
father of Re); there was no place to stand,62 and other texts speak of the primordial
hillock. Re/Atum came into being as Khepri (morning sun/scarab). Re masturbates or
spits out:63 Shu (air), Tefnut (moisture), Nun ("the eldest god... the father"), and
Atum/ Re, etc.64
The Hebrew Bible has an account of primordial waters, though existing at the
same time as the creation of the earth,
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of
the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Genesis
1:2, King James transl.)
Further East, the Old Indian (Vedic) myth of a primordial salty ocean has already been
discussed above. A later Vedic text puts it in a way vaguely recalling the Biblical
account,
Then Gargī Vaicaknåvī asked him: 'Yåjñavalkya,
all of this (universe) is woven, warp and woof, in the waters. In what then are
the waters woven?' -- 'In the wind... is all this salty ocean (salila) woven...'
Chinese myth also speaks of the primordial waters: "When the earth was covered with
water, the heavenly Lord sent down one of his subjects to prepare it (for habitation)."
Their southern neighbors, the Tai people of Northern Indochina, who are part of the
great family that speaks Austric languages, also regard the earth as a flooded terrain,
and “this concept fits well the cosmology of a continental population.”65
The primordial waters are also found in Siberia, for example with the
Tunguse: (see below, section 3.3), or with the Ainu
In the beginning the world was a big swamp. Water was completely mixed up
with earth... there was no life... god created the wagtail bird and sent it down
from heaven to bring forth the earth... It flew about, tread on the swamp and
beat its tail up and down... Dry earth emerged on these spots... The earth grew
more and more, finally emerged from the waters and swam on it. That is why
the Ainus call it moshiri) "swimming earth".66
Not surprisingly the Amerindians have concepts similar to those of their Siberian
homeland across the Bering Strait. The oldest records are those of the Aztecs and

god: cf. the Boshongo (Central Luanda) myth: "in the beginning, in the dark, there was nothing but
water and Bumba was alone... He retched on strained and vomited up the sun. After that light spread
over everything. The heat of the sun dried up the water until the black edges of the world began to show...
Bumba vomited up the moon and then the stars ... and nine living creatures ... last of all came men"
(Eliade, 1977: 91); cf. n. 63, 91.
62 Cf. Izanami and Izanagi's creation of the Japanese islands.
63 Spitting out seen with Izanagi, Amaterasu;Thompson (1993), motif A618.2. Universe created by
spitting. Melanesia: Wheeler 66; cf. creation by vomiting (India: Śiva), and Thompson (1993), motif
A700.2. Heavenly bodies vomited up by creator. Bushongo: Werner African 144; see n. 61, 91.
64 Memphis version c. 2700 BCE? In a copy of c. 700 BCE, Ptah, the locally highest god, creates by
conceiving the elements of the universe in his mind ("heart") and brings them into being by his speech
("tongue"). One of his forms was Ta-tenen "the land arising" (out of the primordial waters), also "lord
of the years".
65 N. Matsumoto 1928: 116, from: M.H. Maspero, Légendes mythologiques dans le Chou King, JA 204:
65.
66 Findeisen 1970: 18. The idea is reflected in the wagtail dress of Oo-Kuni-nushi.no Kami (Kojiki 1.30,
cf. Philippi 1968 ad loc.).
Mayas. However, in their mythologies as well as in many other Amerindian ones, the
origin of the world from primordial waters is not as clear as in Eurasia proper, as it is
part of the myth of the four ages, which results in a fourfold creation that existed
before ours.67 The last one, however, was swept away by the great flood.68 The Aztecs,
for example, have an account of four ages preceding our times, "the four suns". The
Mayas, too, speak of a fourfold creation. According to their Pol Vuh, in the beginning,
The face of the earth was not yet to be seen; only the peaceful sea and the
expanse of the heavens... Then ... (Tepeu and Gucumatz) ... spoke: 'Let it be
done. Let the waters retire and cease to obstruct, to the end that earth exist
here, that it harden itself and show its surface..."
Other Amerindian tribes, whose myths have been recorded only relatively late, agree
(Bierhorst 1986). The Omaha, for example, tell
At the beginning all things were in the mind of Wakonda. All creatures,
including man, were spirits... They descended to the earth. The saw it was
covered with water... Suddenly from the midst of the water up rose a great
rock. It burst into flames and the water floated into the air in clouds. Dry land
appeared..."69
The Maidu of California have a myth that agrees more with the Siberian version and
the earth diver motifs (see §3.3)
In the beginning there was no sun, no moon, no stars. All was dark and
everywhere there was only water. A raft came floating on the water. On it were
Turtle (A'nōshma) and Father of the Secret Society (Pehẽ'ipe). Then from the
sky a rope of feathers... was let down and down it came Earth-Iniatiate...
(Turtle then dove into the water four times, each time bringing up a little more
earth). The fourth time... it was as big as the world, the raft was aground and all
around were mountains as far as he could see...70
Finally, the South American Chibcha71 tell that humankind was created by a common
mother, Bachue, who came out of a swamp together with a small boy. Later, many
children, including our ancestors, were born from this couple. A similar myth is told in
Amazonia and among the Inca (see § 3.7).72

§ 3.3. Earth diver and floating earth

In 'logical' continuation of the mytheme of the primordial waters, many mythologies

67 Cf. Hesiod's 4-5 creations (Kirk 1970: 226 sqq), the famous four ages, from golden to iron, plus that of
the heroes (after the bronze age).
68 Soisson 1987: 97 (cosmogonie).
69 Eliade 1977: 84
70 Eliade 1977: 88
71 Lehmann-Nitsche. R. Studien zur südamerikanischen Mythologie, die ätiologischen Motive. Hamburg:
Friederichsen, de Gruyter 1939: 115
72 Note however, that Thompson (1993), Motif A810. Primeval water: In the beginning everything is
covered with water is also found in Australia and in Africa: Oceanic: Dixon 270 (Arunta); Bushongo:
Werner African 144, African: Stanley 5. The motif, perhaps originally connected with the ubiquitous
flood myth, must be investigated further.
envisage the earth as floating on the ocean,73 from where it has been brought up by
the 'Earth Diver'.74 This figure is prominently found in Asia and North America as a
diver bird or a musk rat.
However, in South Asia, it is another animal that roots in mud, the boar. This
version is found in an early post-Rgvedic texts, (Paippalåda Atharvaveda 6.7.2-3,
Kaha Sahitå 8.2, see Witzel 2004), thus after c. 1000 BCE. Mud brought up from
the bottom of the ocean by a boar forms the new, still shaky (śithira) earth, floating on
the ocean. Later on the motif developed into the famous Hindu myth of Viu's boar
(Våråha)incarnation. However, the concept may be much older in South Asia as boar
worship is found in the (only post-glacially) isolated Andamans (and in the
subcontinent proper). Andaman archeology indicates a boar cult already at c. 3000
BCE (Witzel 2004), and there are echoes of it in the
gveda (Emua myth, Kuiper
1950, 1991, Witzel 1999).75
Its 'logical' outcome is the very common mytheme of the earth floating on the
primordial waters. As indicated, the oldest preserved version, perhaps, is again found
in some early post-
gvedic texts: Maitråyai Sahitå 1.10.13, Kaha Sahitå 36.7: the
earth was sithila 'shaky,' Indra fixed it with mountains,76 whose wings he hadcut off.
In other versions, peoples in Siberia, India, Indonesia, and South America see
the earth as a float on the primordial ocean.77 Among the Tunguse, the myth has
incorporated some of the Christian figures of their Russian neighbors:
In the beginning there was no land, and god, the holy Nicolas, and a dog were
on a float... The devil wanted to drag god from the float, but the more he

73 Thompson (1993), motif A800--A839. Creation of the earth: A810. Primeval water; A811. Earth
brought up from bottom of primeval water. (Cf. A812). India: Thompson-Balys.--New Britain, New
Hebrides: Dixon 105. (see: http://www.sacred-texts.com/pac/om/index.htm). As the myth belongs to non-
Laurasian myths, the New Britain version must be investigated separately. Dixon, however indicates
that it is only found close to Polynesian and Micronesian areas.
74 An aberrant version combines this myth with that of a primordial egg; see Thompson (1993), motif
A812.2. Earth from egg from bottom of sea recovered by bird.--Borneo: Dixon 165. A814.9. Earth from
egg breaking on primeval water. (Cf. A1222).--India: Thompson-Balys. A701.1. Origin of sky from egg
brought from primeval water.
75 According to R. Villems, Genetics and Mythology -- an unexplored field, presentation at the VIIth
Round Table (Kyoto, June 2005), the diver myth is also found in Australia, based on materials provided
by Yuri Berezkin (Sankt Peterburg). However, the myth is missing in Australia in Berezkin's paper
given at Tartu: Dwarfs and Cranes. Baltic Finnish Mythologies in Eurasian and American Perspective.
70 years after V. Toivonen [s.v. earth diver and earth dropper]. Like other exceptional attestations outside
the Laurasian area, this myth is in urgent need of further investigation. It may turn out to be an old,
Pan-Gaean myth.
76 A common version see Thompson (1993), motifs A1185. Wings cut from flying mountains. In
beginning mountains have wings. They are cut off by thunderbolt.--Hindu: Penzer VI 3 n. 1; India:
Thompson-Balys; A964.2., A1185. Wings cut from flying mountains; A1142.4 Origin of thunder clouds:
from wings of mountains. India: Thompson-Balys. Cf. also: A1125. Winds caused by flapping wings. A
giant bird causes the wind with his wings. The wings are cut by the culture hero so that the bird cannot
flap so hard.
77 Thompson (1993), motif A813. Raft in primeval sea. Creator is on the raft and there creates the earth.
(Cf. A812.)--India: Thompson-Balys; Sumatra: Dixon 162. A813.1. Earth in form of raft supported by
spirits. S. Am. Indian (Yuracare): Métraux BBAE CXLIII (3) 503. A813.2. Lotus-leaf raft in primeval
sea. India: Thompson-Balys. See above, the Amerindian Maidu myth, with n. 70.
 dragged the bigger the float became... it became the immense earth.78
Their Northeast Asian neighbors, the Ainu, tell of a bird, the wagtail, that helps in
spreading out the emerging earth (see above, n.66).
In N. America, among the Omaha, we have a version that reminds of old Egypt:
Suddenly from the midst of the water up rose a great rock. It burst into flames
and the water floated into the air in clouds. Dry land appeared.
Another, somewhat aberrant version is found in Polynesia and in Japanese myth: the
gods bring out the earth or some of its islands with the help of fish hooks.79
Or, the lands of the earth are churned by the gods out of the primordial sea;
for example in Japan (Kojiki 1.6), or in India (Råmåyaa 1.45.15-25), where this
primordial churning is closely connected with the anti-gods, the Asura, who help in
the undertaking, and results in the birth of various (semi-)divine beings.
This myth, first appears in Vedic Indian mythology, where we have the
enigmatic sentence about the birth of the earth through an action of the gods who
stood in a flood and foam was splashing off them (as if they were dancing, RV 10.72.6).
In later Indian myth (Råmåyaa epic), the gods took Mount Mandara (Meru),
reversed it and put it on its top, wound the world snake Śea around it and churned
the ocean to extract the drink of immortality (amta). The action is represented, in
gigantic form, at Angkor Wat. We can compare this with an archeological find in
Jutland80 (W. Denmark): an inverted tree was put into a stone mill and set into a pile
of stones,81 which describes a movement that has an astronomical significance as well
(Witzel 1984).
In sum, in most cases, Heaven and Earth arose out of a void, of chaos, that is
often identified with a watery waste, from which the earth was fished by some other
aquatic animal. However, in addition, we find myths relating creation out of a
primordial being that was dismembered, or from a primordial egg that split up. Again,
in the case of India, we find all of these myths already in the RV or immediately after it;
in Finland they have even been amalgamated into a single story (see § 3.7).

§ 3.4. Primordial giant.

However, in addition to the emergence of the world from darkness and primordial
waters there also are the two seemingly aberrant versions of a primordial giant or egg.
This giant was in existence before the world emerged: he was somehow killed, carved
up and its various body parts became the origin of heaven and earth and even of
humans.
The well-known prototype is the Germanic Ymir, who is slain and from whose
skull heaven is made, from his ribs the mountains, etc. In India it is purua "man", from
whose body the various parts of heaven and earth are created, including even men (RV
10.90). In China, there is the quite similar myth of Pangu (P'an ku).82 One can also
compare some Greek and Near Eastern variants: the Greek myth of the spilling of

78 Findeisen 1970: 17.

79 In local Izumo tales, cf. also Kojiki 1.30.
80 Feddersen, Aarböger f. nord. Oldkynlighet og Historie, 1881: 360
81 Witzel 1984, 213-279, n. 103.
82 See Aston 1972 [1896]: 33, note 2.; Mathieu 1989.
Kronos' blood as to fertilize earth, or the Mesopotamian creation of man from mud
and blood: the gods decide that has one of them, Kingu, was to be killed so that
humans could be created from his blood.
The longest and oldest version of this myth is found in the
gveda (10.90),
where the primordial purua 'man' is carved up.

RV 10.90.7 sqq:
7. ...the gods, the Sådhyas, and the
is (Seers, poets) offered him (Purua) for
themselves...
11. When they portioned out Purua, in how many parts did they fashion him?
What are his mouth, arms, thighs, and feet called ?
12. His mouth was the Brahmin, his arms were the nobleman, his thighs were
the Vaiśya, from his feet the Śūdra was born.
13. The moon has been born from his mind, the sun was born from his eye;
from his mouth was born Indra and Agni, and from his breath the wind.
14. From his navel there was the atmosphere, from his head developed heaven,
from his feet the earth, from his ears the cardinal directions. Thus they
fashioned the worlds.
16. With sacrifice the gods offered to sacrifice. These were the first forms (of
sacrifice).
The same myth occurs in the Old Norse Edda (Grimnismål 40, c. 1000 CE), where the
primordial giant Ymir is carved up.83
From Ymir's flesh the earth was created,
from the sweat the sea;
from the bones the mountains, from the hairs the trees,
from the skull, Heaven.
The corresponding old Indian hymn from the
gveda (10.90), quoted above, often
reads like a translation, or vice versa.
The correspondence opens up the possibility that this is an old, Indo-
European idea.84 This is strengthened by the closely related Old Norse myth of the god
Odin, who hung himself on the Yggdrasil tree for nine days and nights as an offering
by himself to himself. This again has a Vedic parallel, in that “the gods offered the
sacrifice with the sacrificeò (RV 1.164.50, cf. RV 10.90.16, above).
There also are a number of local south Asian reminisces of this myth, for
example in Nuristani (Kafiri) myth in N.E. Afghanistan and in Kashmir,85 or in Rome,
by the killing by Romulus of his brother Remus (< *Yemus, representing the Indian

83 Linguistically, Ymir is = Ved. Yama, the brother of Manu, ancestor of all humans; see below n. 115.
Thompson (1993), Motif A961.4. Mountains spring from scattered parts of slain giant serpent's body.
India: Thompson-Balys. A961.5. Mountains (cliffs) from bones of killed giant. Icel.: Boberg.
84 For the description of the “canonical creature” visible in this myth, in sorcery (Merseburg sorcery
stanzas, Atharvaveda, etc.) and also elsewhere, see Watkins 1995.
85 Thompson (1993), Motif A642.1. Primeval woman cut in pieces: houses, etc., made from her body.
India: Thompson-Balys.-- Motif: Entry A1724.1. A1724.1. Animals from body of slain person. India:
Thompson-Balys. However, note A969.1. Mountain from buried giant. India: Thompson-Balys.
A1716.1. - In Kashmir, a giant Råkasa demon killed and an embankment is built from him on the
Vitastå (setu, the modern Suth at Srinagar), using his leg and knee (see STEIN , Råjataragiī 3.336-358,
ad loc.; cf. 1.159, Yaka dikes); cf. also the initial section of the Finnish Kalevala (Witzel 2004).
Yama),86 and in the Hebrew Bible, by Cain's claying of his brother Able.87
However, the myth is also found in Southern China, from where it has entered
st
the standard old Chinese texts (late 1 mill. BCE). It thus is originally an Austro-Thai
myth (Mathieu 1989). According to this version, the primordial giant Pangu was cut
up in similar fashion. The first version of which has close similarities with the Tahiti
version (Ta'aroa, above § 3.1), which is not surprising, given that both the Austro-
Thai and Austronesian language families originated in southern China.
(1) First there was the great cosmic egg. Inside the egg was Chaos, and floating
in Chaos was P'an ku, the undeveloped, the divine embryo. And P'an ku burst
out of the egg... with an adze in his hand with which he fashioned the world. ...
He chiseled the land ands sky apart. He pulled up the mountains on the earth
and dug the valleys deep, and made courses for the rivers. High above ride the
sun and moon and stars in the sky where P'an ku placed them; below roll the
four seas...
(2) The world was never finished until P'an ku died. ... from his skull was
shaped the dome of the sky, and from his flesh was formed the soil of the fields;
from his bones came the rocks, form his blood the rivers and seas; from his hair
came all vegetation. His breath was the wind; his voice made thunder; his right
eye became the moon, his left eye the sun. From his saliva or sweat came rain.
And from the vermin which covered his body came forth mankind. (Sproul
1991: 201-2)
Related is the Borneo and Philipino myth of the origin of animals from different parts
of body of a slain giant.88 In Japan, dismemberment is not a feature of primordial
creation but it occurs after the violent death of Izanami, that is, after she was severely
burnt while giving birth to the fire god, Hi.no yagi-haya-wo.no kami (Kojiki 1.7).89
From her body were created the eight thunders.90 Later, from the blood of the fire
god, killed by Izanagi, various gods were created, a general trend that is continued by
the creation of many other gods from the various polluted parts of the dress and body

86 Puhvel 1987: 287-9.

87 The contest between the Japanese divine brothers Ho-wori and Ho-deri, farmer and fisher ( Kojiki
1.42), does not have a lethal outcome. Philippi (1968: 148) compares the tale to others in Indonesia, the
Marshall Islands and the American Pacific North West.
88 Thompson (1993), motif A1716.1. Animals from different parts of body of slain giant. Giant person,
cow, ox, etc.: Borneo, Philippines: Dixon 177.
89 Cf. in the Veda, Måtariśvan "swelling in the mother,” a secret name of the Fire deity, Agni. Note that
Agni is born three times: in heaven, on earth (in ritual) and in the waters, RV 10.45.1 (sometimes also
garbho rodasyo: in the earth); and cf. that there are several fire gods in Japan as well: the one mentioned
above, then several others born from the decaying body of Izanami. The first fire god is killed by Izanagi
in revenge for burning her; (cf. Agni's repeated death, explained as he burns up in ritual). Then,
Izanami's burning and subsequent death could reflect the ritual production of fire by drilling it (as still
done at important Shinto and Vedic rituals).
90 This is somewhat reminiscent, as Japanese mythologists have pointed out, of the myth of Hainuwele
"coconut branch" (Ceram, New Guinea, cf. Eliade 1977: 18, studied in detail by Jensen 1939: no.11 sqq.;
Jensen 1948: 113 sq. - Hainuwele had grown from a coconut tree, furthered by the blood from the wound
of a man and quickly grew into a woman; she was killed by local people during the great Maro festival
(cf. now Campbell 1988: vol. II.1 : 70 sqq) and buried in pieces; from her several graves grew various
plants, especially tubers; her arms were made into a gate: all men who could pass through it remained
human; those who could not, became various animals or spirits.
of Izanagi, at this great purification on his return from the netherworld.
However, different from the other Eurasian myths, the various parts of
Izanami's body do not become parts of the universe. In fact, most of the constituent
parts of the universe, especially all the islands of Japan as well as many deities of the sea,
the waters and rivers, the wind, the mountains, the plains, the land, etc., had already
been born by Izanami, and even when about to die, she still gave birth to various gods
from her vomit, feces and urine.91 The case of the killing of the Fire god (Kojiki 1.8)
and the birth of various gods from his blood is closer to the myths reported above
from Greece and the Near East.
A somewhat aberrant version of the myth of primordial giant is the Hittite
(originally Hurrite) version in which Ullikummi is a primordial giant of stone
(Gurney 1976: 192, Haas 1982), with which the Polynesian story of a pre-existing rock
may be compared.92
In Japan, the large rock pillar at Shingu (Wakayama Pref.), representing
Izanagi, is worshipped rather than the deities in the adjacent Shinto shrine.93 Note also
that in Chinese myth, Yü, the first king of the Hsia dynasty, was born from his father
Kun, who had turned into stone. This happened after his execution by the High God,
because he had stolen the magic “swelling mold” from him, by which one could build
dams to stem the flood. Yü was born when his father's belly was cut open after three
years. 94 Similarly, Ch'i, the son of the first Hsia king, was born from his mother Tu
Shan, who had changed into a rock when frightened by her husband, Kun, who had
changed into a bear95 (K.C. Chang 1983: 10).

In sum, there is fairly wide-spread evidence for a Laurasian myth that entailed
the origin of the world from a pre-exiting giant, sometimes made of stone. The carving
up of the primordial giant may represent a very old stage of (Laurasian) mythology,
going back to Stone Age hunter times.96 The giant would then be a reflection of the
hunted or killed animals that were carved up in a similar way, one that could be seen
until recently in the North European (Saami), North Asian and Ainu bear sacrifice.97
(see section 3.7). The bones of such animals must not be cut and preserved intact as to
allow their rebirth (in heaven or in this world).98

91 Cf. the case of the Japanese food deity, Oogetsu, Kojiki 1.18, with Philippi 1968, additional note 11;
note further that the body hairs of Susa.no Wo became various kinds of trees (Nihon Shoki 1.57-58). For
creation from vomiting see above n. 61, 63; Egyptian and Indian Śiva myths (with the pseudo-
etymology, mythologically grounded, of bhi 'to fear' + ru 'to shout' + vam 'to vomit' > Bhairava = Śiva.
Cf. also Thompson (1993), motif A700.2. Heavenly bodies vomited up by creator.
92 See Thompson (1993), motif A644. Universe from pre-existing rocks. Originally rocks are assumed
and everything is made from them.--Samoa: Dixon 17).
93 (Observation, February 1990). On the other side if the valley there is another rock, with a vulva-like
cavity, representing Izanami.
94 K.C. Chang 1983: 10, and Bodde 1961: 399.
95 Note the role of the bear as ancestor in Korean myth, at c. 2500 BCE, Samguk Yusa.
96 There even is a slight chance that the myth may already have been a Neanderthal one (if they had
speech): the bear offerings, head separated, are widely found (Campbell 1988: I.1: 54 sqq; also, a stone age
bear figure with head attached has been found in a French cave.
97 See the pictorial evidence in Campbell 1988: I.2: 152 sqq.
98 For the Vedic customs (see Witzel 1987); cf. Thor's ram whose body is reconstituted form its bones,
similarly the role of astuuant 'bone having' (life) in Zoroastrian texts (Avesta); note also the post-
 While the Germanic and Vedic myths99 of Purua and Ymir may thus go back
to Indo-European mythology, the southern Chinese (Austric), Austronesian,
Polynesian and Hittite version represent other traditions. However, in all these cases
they were no longer told by ancient hunters and gatherers but by food producing
societies,100 in sum, they were reminiscences of an earlier stage of culture -- and
presumable, of mythology.

§ 3.5. Primordial bull

This motif is further developed in the closely related version of a late stone age animal
sacrifice (see § 3.6, later), mostly that of a bull. It appears as the second Indo-
European version (Lincoln 1986: 39 sqq.),101 which does not feature a giant or a
primordial hunted animal but a primordial bovine. It is seen in the Icelandic cow
Audumla and, more importantly, in the Iranian primordial bull;102 the same idea is
also found in a Vedic passage,103 and importantly, in the Old Irish Tain Bo Cuailnge
(4854-4919), the great battle between the two bulls, in the victorious one, Donn
Cualnge, spread the remains of, the other one, Finnbennach, all over Ireland.
The idea of bull sacrifice (cattle or buffalo) seems prominent in the
Mediterranean, Indian and Austric world; its appearance in early Indo-Iranian texts
may be due to such southern influences.
If, however, this mytheme was already Indo-European (Lincoln 1986), it could
represent a later version of the myth of the primordial giant: it would be preferred by
a largely pastoral people, such as the early Indo-Europeans. It is, then, not surprising
that in Icelandic myth, a primordial cow (Audumla) licks the primordial giant (Ymir)
out of the eternal ice and her milk nourishes him (cf. Völuspå 3, Vafθrūnismål 21).
The Indo-European myth has been reconstructed by B. Lincoln (1986: 2, 66 sq, 86)

Persian rebirth of humans from their graves in the Hebrew Bible (Daniel 12.2); further Thompson
(1993), motif A1724.1. Animals from body of slain person. India: Thompson-Balys, A2001. Insects from
body of slain monster. A2611.3. Coconut tree from head of slain monster. E610. Reincarnation as
animal. E613.0.5. Severed heads of monster become birds.
99 Thompson (1993), motif A642. Universe from body of slain giant. Ymir. See A621.1.--Icel.: De la
Saussaye 341. A831.2. Earth from giantôs body (Ymir). (Cf. A614.1.). Handwb. d. Abergl. IX Nachträge
282.--Icel: MacCulloch Eddic 325; India: Thompson-Balys.
100 However, they also do not represent archaic agricultural/horticultural mythology, such as seen in
the Melanesian Hainuwele myth; see Adolf Jensen, Die getötete Gottheit, Stuttgart 1968; G. Hatt, The corn
mother in America and Indonesia, Anthropos 46, 1951, 853-914; cf. B. Lincoln, Myth, Cosmos, and Society,
Cambridge: Harvard 1986, p.173 n.1.
101 Dionysus of Halicarnassus, Empedocles, Herodotos 1.131 (Iran); see Thompson (1993), motif
A1716.1. Animals from different parts of body of slain giant. Giant person, cow, ox, etc.--Persian: Carnoy
288.--Borneo, Philippines: Dixon 177.
102 Thompson (1993), motif A1791. Giant ox ancestor of all animals. Persian: Carnoy 289. B871.1.1.
Giant ox. For Old Iran see Bundhishn, III.13, and XIV.1, detailing the origin of plants and animals from
the bull's remains.
103 RV 3.38 (a hymn later assigned to Indra): the androgynous 'older bull' (vabha) Asura, the 'great
hoary' bull, gives birth to or creates the world; he is in part identified with Heaven and Earth (Rodasī);
the (younger) bull, Heaven/Sun, is also called Asura Viśvarūpa, cf. Witzel 2004. For post- RV versions of
the mytheme see Lincoln 1986: 65 sqq, and especially pp. 73, 86.
and reformulated by P. Raffetta 2002.
At the beginning there were two men and a bull. These men were twin brothers,
Manu and Yemos. Manu was the first Priest, Yemos was the first King. Manu
sacrificed his brother, dismembered his body and with his parts he formed the
world. Then he sacrificed the bull, dismembered its body and with his parts
Manu created edible plants and domestic animals. Yemos, the first dead man,
became King of the Dead, and his realm he opened for all those who followed.
This is, according to Lincoln, the Proto-Myth of Creation among the Proto-Indo
Europeans. As soon as these PIE evolved into the different Indo-European
peoples, this myth changed, evolved, adapted itself to different environs, to
different points of view, until it became almost completely disguised into folklore
and religion. But this original proto-myth underlies all Indo-European
cosmologies, every Indo-European creation myth, every Indo-European sacrifice.
For Sacrifice is, according to this cosmovision, the act of reunification of this
Cosmos that was once divided.104
In other parts of the globe, primarily in S.E. Asia and parts of Eastern and central
India, it is the buffalo that plays this role (Brighenti 2003). However, one may add that
buffalo sacrifice and putting up the offered animal's horns on temples is also found
with the Tibeto-Burmese Newars of the Kathmandu Valley, and that the customs is
more widely spread in the Himalayas. Finally, the old Mediterranean tradition of bull
chasing, sport, and sacrifice has to be taken into account (Çatal Hüyük, ancient Crete,
and Spain).

§ 3.6. Primordial egg

Still another version is that of a primordial egg; it is more widespread than that of the
giant.105 The universe is created by splitting up an egg; its upper half becomes the
vault of the sky and the lower part the earth.1 0 6 The mytheme of the egg shell
becoming the sky107 is closely related to that of using the primordial giant's skull for
the vault of the heaven; in fact, the words for skull and cup or bowl often are the
same.
An old version is again found in Vedic myth: Jaiminīya Bråhmana 3.360-1
speaks of the primordial nothingness (quoting RV 10.129), the great salt ocean, from
which an egg arose; it split, after a hundred divine years, into and upper (heaven) part
and a lower one (earth).108 Similarly, Śatapatha Bråhmaa (11.1.6) has the primordial

104 According to the summary by Paola Raffetta of her paper On the Creation of Domestic Animals in
Proto-Indo-European Mythology, presented at the "Pecus: Man and Animal in Antiquity" conference,
Swedish Institute, Rome, September 2002 (see:
http://www.svabhinava.org/friends/PaolaRaffetta/CreationDomesticAnimals-frame.html.)
105 In the Kujiki, "Of old, the original essence was a chaotic mass. Heaven and Earth had not yet been
separated, but were like an egg, of ill-defined limits, and containing germs. Thereafter, the pure essence,
ascending by degrees, became thinly spread out, and formed Heaven...." (Aston, Nihongi 1896: 2, n. 1).
106 Note also the aberrant stories. Thompson (1993), motifs A812.2. Earth from egg from bottom of sea
recovered by bird. -- Borneo: Dixon 165. A814.9. Earth from egg breaking on primeval water. (Cf.
A1222). --India: Thompson-Balys. A701.1. Origin of sky from egg brought from primeval water.
107 A701.1. Origin of sky from egg brought from primeval water.
108 See Hoffmann 1975-6: 519-22
waters, then an egg, from which the creator god Prajåpati burst forth after a year; he
created the worlds by speech, and then the gods and the anti-gods (Asuras) from his
the breath.
A still older version, found in RV 10.121.7-9 speaks of a golden embryo
(hirayagarbha, Bosch 1960), in the midst of the high 'waters' (vs. 7) from which all
developed: the (Himalayan) snow mountains, the ocean and the Raså, the directions of
the sky, Heaven and Earth, the Sun and the Sky. This is similar to the old Egyptian
idea of the vast primordial ocean (Nun) with no surface, that was compared to an egg
(Ions 1990).
However the myth is also found in Greece, Finland, Indonesia, Hawai'i, New
Zealand,109 -- and by exception, even in Africa1 1 0 (which is in need of a special
investigation, as countercheck).
An aberrant version, from Borneo111 is linked to the myth of the earth
retrieved from the bottom of the ocean, is that of the earth recovered by a bird as an
egg, again, from the bottom of the ocean.
Other versions of this myth have even the humans develop from it.112 It is
found with the Munda (Santals),113 and also with the Khasi. Since both peoples speak
Austric languages, it is not surprising that a similar version is also found in non-Han
Southern China, home to both the Austric and Miao-Thai/Kadai language families.114
When the great flooding of the Yellow River devastated the land, it killed all
mankind. Only a brother and a sister survived by grabbing hold of a big tree
trunk. They ended up on a mountain top when the water finally receded.
In order to repopulate the land, the brother made the sister pregnant. But she
gave birth only to a large, white egg. When the brother wanted to throw it away,
the sister protected it with her life. His blows fell on her instead. But when she
cried, “ko-ko ta” (Brother, you are beating me), he felt sorry and relented.
However the myth of the origin from an egg is also found in Oceania, Indonesia, and
South America. A variant is the myth of the origin of humans from an egg. It is found

109 Thompon, motifs A641. Cosmic egg. A701.1. Origin of sky from egg brought from primeval water.
A641. Cosmic egg. The universe brought forth from an egg.--Lang Myth. I 252; Dh I 19.--Finnish:
Kalevala rune 1; Esthonian: Eisen Estnische Mythologie 170, Loorits Grundząge I 447f.; Hindu: Keith 74;
Society Is., Hawaiian, Maori: Dixon 20; Hawaii: Henry 345. A641.1. Heaven and earth from egg. They
are the two halves of an egg shell. Eros escapes as they are separated.--Greek: Fox 5.--Indonesian: L. d.
Backer L'Archipel indien 232. A641.2. Creation from duck's eggs. Upper vault from half shell, lower
vault from half shell, moonbeams from whites, sunshine from yellows, starlight from motley parts,
clouds from dark parts.--Finnish: Kalevala rune 1. A655. World as egg.
110 See Frobenius 1978: vol. X : 119.
111 A812.2. Earth from egg from bottom of sea recovered by bird.--Borneo: Dixon 165.
112 A1222. Mankind originates from eggs: A1222. Mankind originates from eggs. Chinese: Eberhard
FFC CXX 89 No. 49; India: Thompson-Balys; Oceanic: Dixon 109 (Fiji, Torres Straits, Admiralty Is.),
109 n. 17 (Polynesia, Indonesia, Micronesia), 160 (Sumatra), 169f. (Indonesia), Handy 125
(Marquesas); S. Am. Indian (Jivaro): Métraux RMLP XXXIII 148, (Mbaya): Métraux BBAE CXLIII (1)
367. A1261.2. Man created from egg formed from sea-foam. Minahassa (Celebes): Dixon 157.
113 In Santal myth the first humans developed from two eggs, laid by a goose made of grass (Orans
1965: 5) or were created by the primordial deities (Otẽ Boråm and Sing Bonga), put in a cave, and made
drunk on rice beer, to have sex and produce children (Hastings 1928, s.v. Mūås §4, Dravidians (North
India), §38.
114 E.W. Lai, personal comm. Feb 2004.
in old China, especially along the eastern Sea board; but it also is related about the
origin of the first Shang king as well as that of Koguryo (Chang 1983: 10, Beckwith
2004); an egg as origin of humans in general is found in Munda and Khasi myth (see
above).
The question may now be put whether the myth of the origin of the world
(and secondarily, of gods and humans)115 from an egg can be linked with that of the
primordial waters. After all, 'water' is a prominent part of the contents of an egg.
Inside these fluids the primeval germ was created, generating the contents of the egg.
The two halves of the egg are also linked to that of the skull of the primordial giant, as
already noted. In sum, though the number of mythemes is not completely reduced, it
can be seen that many of them are 'logically' related, not in the least by the typical
human faculty of making links and correlations (Farmer et al., 2000).

***

Evaluating the evidence presented in this section, we may posit a 'logical'

development: chaos/darkness --> primordial waters --> [diver myth] floating earth /
(primordial egg/giant) --> emergence of heaven and earth. In most cases, only certain
sections of this scheme have been preserved in the various Laurasian mythologies.
Further, as has been pointed out above, the mytheme of the primordial giant
does not fit well into the Laurasian scheme. It may well go back to much older, Stone
Age ideas of carving up hunted animals,116 and was inserted at the time the new
Laurasian mythology was created about 40,000 years ago.
Depending on the evaluation of the various diver myths (Villems 2005) that are
found in Australia and Papua, we may have to expand the range and age of this
mytheme beyond the Laurasian sphere and classify it as an ‘Out of Africa’ myth, but
one that was formed before the creation of the Laurasian story line.
Using this kind of evidence together with that of the flood myth (that is found in
Laurasia but also in Africa, the Andaman Islands, Papua and Australia), this discovery
leads to a further layering of the development of Laurasian and other mythologies:

• Pan-Gaean myths: the primeval giant; flood myth, etc.

• Out of Africa myths : the earth diver myth, etc.

115 Thompson (1993), motifs A27. Creator born from egg. Chinese: Eberhard FFC CXX 98f. A114.2.
God born from egg. A114.2. God born from egg. Tahiti: Henry 337; Marquesas: Handy 104.--So. Am.
Indian (Huamachuco): Métraux RMLP XXXIII 151. A114.2.1. Deity born in shape of egg. Hawaii:
Beckwith Myth 169. Cf. also the Indo-Iranian myth of the sun deity Vivasvant who was born form a
'dead egg' (Mårtåa, Hoffmann, K. Mårtåa und Gayōmart, MSS 11, 1957, 85-103 [Repr. Aufsätze zur
Indoiranistik, Wiesbaden 1975/6: 422-438; Engl. transl.: Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik Wiesbaden 1992: 715-
732) and who became the ancestor both of the lord of the other/nether world, Yama, and of humans,
Manu; cf. Thompson (1993) motif A511.1.9. Culture hero born from egg. S. Am. Indian (Jivaro):
Métraux RMLP XXXIII 148, (Huamachuco): ibid. 151, (North Peru): Métraux ibid. 133. A1222.
Mankind originates from eggs.
116 The egg myth may be derived from or a variant of the killing and dissection of the primordial
giant/mammal as hunters could easily observe eggs still contained inside killed birds and the various
stages of bird embryos in eggs. Such myths would then be remnants of older, Pan-Gaean ones.
• Laurasian mythology: incorporation of both mythemes into its story line

If this is correct, we would arrive at the very formation of the new Laurasian creation
myth. It envisaged primordial darkness hovering over primordial waters; out of this,
the earth emerged, as primordial hill or it was fished up, floating on the ocean. It had
to be stabilized (see §3.3, 3.4) and to be separated from heaven (see n. 27 and passim).
As an afterthought, we will now look into several versions of these myths that
creatively combine many or most of the six versions discussed above.

§ 3.7. Combined forms

In the national epic of Finland, the Kalevala,117 we find the following story that reflects
a joining of two motives, that of the birth of the earth from water, with the help of a
bird and a second one, the birth of the earth and heaven from a primordial egg:
Luonnotar, "the daughter of nature (ilma)", let herself fall from the celestial
regions into the sea and floated about until the sea made her pregnant. Having
floated about for seven centuries, an eagle (or a duck) searching for a resting
place, sat down on her knee and built a nest on it. Luonnotar felt a pain in her
knee and the moved it so that the bird's eggs fell into the sea. Their lower part
became the earth, and their upper part heaven, their yolk the sun, their white
part the moon, their spotted fragments the stars and their black fragments the
clouds.
The South American Chibcha118 people have a fairly confused mythology. Next to a
version featuring the creator Chiminigagua, father of all, especially of Sun and Moon,
there also is another version according to which mankind was created by a common
mother, Bachue. She came out of a swamp near Iguape with a boy of three years on her
arm. Grown up, he married her. Many children were born from this couple, four to
six at a time; they are the ancestors. When the two grew old, they disappeared into the
swamp and became snakes.
Similarly, some Amazon peoples believe that the Milky Way first fertilized the
Sun, and that the first mother emerged from a river, followed by the first human
couple, and by the prototypes of the animals and plants. In pre-Colombian Inca belief,
Viracocha created the sun, and the people first emerged from lakes and rivers.119
With the Incas, the Milky Way was also regarded as a river in the sky. In Inca
times, a pilgrimage quite similar to that along the Sarasvatī river in Vedic India (Witzel
1984) existed in the Cusco area where the Vilanota river was identified with the Milky
Way.120

117 Collected in the 19th century by Lönrod form older, medieval oral traditions.
118 In Columbia and Ecuador; based on notes taken by the Spanish conquistadores, see Lehmann-
Nitsche 1939:115.
119 Source: Sherbondy 1982: 3-32.
120 As Carolyn Jongewaard (1986) puts it : “A route traveled by the priests from Cusco was more than a
terrestrial pilgrimage. The annual ritual journey to La Raya along the Vicanota River involved more
than the renewal of the Sun and the Inca. It was a re-enactment of the creation of the Universe by
Viracocha. The journey was equal to a walk along the Milky Way to the point of origin of the universe.
The river was perceived as a mirror of the Milky Way.”
 Finally, the complex case of early Japanese mythology. Early Japanese myths
about the primordial unity of Heaven and Earth are not necessarily derived from
Chinese influence, as many Japanese interpreters of the Kiki maintain, who normally
compare only Chinese texts.121 It is true that the influence of Chinese culture was
strongly felt by the time the Kiki (Kojiki and Nihon Shoki) were first written down in
the early 8th century. However, the Eurasian background of the Kiki explains the
many versions found in these texts in much better fashion.
As has been pointed out above at great length, there are several, similar variants
of the creation myth. All of them are found with just one relatively small tribe in the
eastern Nepalese Himalayas, the Rai. Here, Chinese influence is definitely to be
excluded; one would expect Tibetan or Indian influence.
Such variation is very common in all oral cultures, as can, e.g., be observed
among the Iroquois peoples of North America who have been studied for the last 300-
4000 years.122 Thus, if several variants appear in the Kiki, especially in the Nihon
Shoki, that makes it a point of recording as many as possible, this is not to be marveled
at. If, then, one or two versions seem to agree with Chinese mythology, even these they
may theoretically go back to the older, common Laurasian source. Just their wording
may have been influenced by the then dominant Chinese written culture of the time
period that the Kiki was compiled and put to writing.
Actual creation in the Kiki starts from the primordial waters and is described in
various versions (Nihon Shoki 1.1-3, cf. Kojiki 1.1).
"The divine beings were produced between them... when the world began to be
created, the soil... floated about..."; ... in one writing it is said, "when heaven and
earth began, a thing existed in the midst of the void..."; another, "of old, when
the land was young and the earth young, it floated about.."; another, "when
heaven and earth began, there were deities produced together..."; another
"before heaven and earth were produced, there was something ... a cloud
floating over the sea123 , a thing was produced shaped like a reed shoot / existed
in the midst of the void... the soil of the young earth floated about..."; or "when
heaven and earth began, a thing was produced in the midst of the void...";
and in the Kojiki (1.1.)
At the time of the beginning of heaven and earth, there came into existence in
Takama.no hara a deity called Ame.no Minaka-nushi.no Kami, next Taka-mi-
musubi.no Kami, next Kami-musubi.no Kami. These three deities all came
into existence, as single deities, and their forms were not visible. Next when the
land was young, resembling floating oil and drifting like a jellyfish, there

121 Such as, early on, Motowori Norinaga and Hirata Atsutane, cf. Herbert 1977: 27. But, thus even in
the latest Engl. translation, by Philippi 1968: 397, "products of literati familiar with Chinese culture..."
He wants native Japanese mythology to begin only with Izanagi/Izanami. However, on comparison
with other mythological regions, it appears that only some of the wording, such as Yin/Yang = In/Yō,
have clearly been influenced by Chinese expressions and models of writing (after all, the Nihon Shoki
was written in Chinese, for an official history of the realm). The multiplicity of the versions of
primordial creation (such as creation out of the void, creation by Izanami and Izanagi by churning the
ocean with a spear) again is partly seen as Chinese influence, versus older Japanese concepts.
122 See McCaskill 1987: 149 sqq.
123 Is there some Chinese influence? Cf. "Then breaths were born from space and time. What was light
moved and formed the sky (easily); what was heavy, the earth..." (Huainan zi), see above § 3.1, n. 24-25.
 sprouted something like reed-shoots (ashi-kabi).124
It is important to note that the three first gods of the Kojiki creation myth are invisible
and worshipped in the Imperial Palace,125 otherwise, only in some minor shrines, as
well as in those of ancient esoteric sects, especially in Kyushu.126
However, the ancient prayer (Norito) texts of the period reveal that there are
two gods who exist even before all other creation, the male Kamuro-gi and the female
Kamuro-mi.127 Interestingly, these two (apparently very secret) primordial gods occur
only in ritual and are never mentioned even in the Kojiki and Nihongi; however, they
survive in Norito and also in O-Harai purification rituals an worship at Ise and other
shrines. They may represent the primordial pair, in Indo-European terms, Father
heaven and Mother Earth that are otherwise missing in the Kiki. Their names
obviously contain the word for "god" kamu/kami and the male/female suffix -gi/-mi,
that are also seem in Izana-gi/Izana-mi.
That these two deities are not mentioned outside the Norito is not surprising
either. The ultimate, primordial gods often are surrounded by a veil of secrecy. They
are only known to a few initiated specialists. This is the case, for example, with the
Polynesian primordial god Io, the supreme being, ancestor of Io-rangi and his son
Tawhito-te-raki.128 Normally the descent of the Polynesian (Maori) gods is listed as
negation (Kore) -> chaos / darkness (Po) -> Rangi "heaven or sky". The supreme god
Io, known only to some priests, escaped early mythographers for quite some time, and
thus is not listed in the older accounts of New Zealand mythology.129 As we have seen
(§3.1-6), in many other mythologies these early divine generations are as vague as they
are in Japan.130
The question of the ultimate origin of the world is thus solved in the Kiki in an
admirable way. First, it states, matter-of-fact, "there was something at the beginning."
The rest devolves from this, first by a-sexual and then, successively, by bi-sexual
creation. There is an inner logic in this. The account begins with the most amorphous,
simplest form of life, a "breath", "something" of unknown gender, and gradually, the
more "developed" gods take shape.... Like their Polynesian neighbors, however, the old

124 This has found many explanations. Hirata thought of light, that later became the sun, which rises
from a cloud (cf. one of the Nihon Shoki variants); the new floating 'earth' is Ama.tsu Kuni or Takama-
hara. -- Or: A descending object which later separates from this and becomes the moon... cf. Herbert 1977:
28; note that in this version Heaven and Earth seem to exist before or at the same time as the birth of the
first gods.
125 See Herbert 1977 : 27, according to information by Harada Ken, then master of ceremonies at the
Palace.
126 According to Uchida M., a Shinto priest (gūji) of Kōchi, in Herbert 1977
127 Philippi (1990: 72, 92-3), translates Kamurogi (Kaburogi) and Kamuromi as 'ancestral gods and
goddesses' (-ro is regarded as a word-building particle without independent meaning). Next to
Kamurogi/Kamuromi (or even Izanagi/Izanami), there are other candidates such as the mysterious
Ame-yuzuru-hi- ame.no sa-giri-kuni-yuzuru-tsuki kuni.no sa-giri.no mikoto or the shadowy god
variously named Toyo-kumo-nu.no kami, Toyo-kumu-nu or Toyo-kuni-nushi.no kami.
128 Cf. above n. 36.
129 See above n. 37 (Eliade 1992: 115).
130 Cf. Philippi 1968: 397 sq. who regards these first generations as typical of Polynesian myths, also
noted by Matsumoto Nobuhiro, Nihon Shinwa no kenkyū, 1956: 181; Philippi sees Chinese influence and
lets Japanese mythology only begin with Izanami.
Japanese have given a lot of thought to these very primordial generations. They were
not content with just a few of them, like the Greeks, but they must explain and list, in
great detail, what these "generations" of gods were. As we cannot discuss these stages in
great detail here, a list, followed by one with my current interpretation, may suffice.

0. Primordial state Primordial ocean, and INTERPRETATION

appearance of: Kamurogi/Kamu-
romi (= Heaven/Earth?) 0. PRIMORDIAL STAGE

1. Polar Star (Mi-naka-nushi) 1. SYMBOL OF STEADINESS

2. Heavenly "pestle"131 (Taka-mi-musubi) 2.PRIMORD . PRODUCTION

3. Earthly "mortar"132 (Kami-musu-bi-[oya] FROM GENERAL MALE /
FEMALE INTERACTION

4. Reed shoot (Umashi-ashi-kabi-hiko-ji) 3. (POSSIBILITY OF )

VEGETATIVE LIFE
5. Heavenly prop (Ame.no toko-tachi) 4. DUALITY : COSMOS / GODS
6. Earthly prop (Kuni.no toko-tachi)

7. Rain god (Toyo-kumo-no) 5. ORIGINS AND POSSIBILTY

8. Wet Earth (m.) (U-hiji-ni) OF VEGETATIVE LIFE
Wet Earth (f.) (Su-hiji-ni)

9. Door Post (m.) (Tsunu-guhi) "germ integrating" 6. POSSIBILITY OF

Door Post (f.) (Iku-guhi) "life integrating" ASCENT TO HEAVEN
10. Male Gate (m.) (Oho-to.no ji) "great place" through gate
Fem. Gate (f.) (Oho-to.no be) "great place"

11. Omo-daru (m.) "Face/surface-complete" 7. INDIVIDUALIZATION

Aya-kashiko-ne (f)"Oh how awsome, ah". IN ANTHROPO-
MORPHIC FORM

12. Izanagi (m.) "Inviting male" 8. HUMAN (- LIKE )

Izanami (f.) "Inviting female" SEXUAL PROCREATION

However, the Ainu neighbors of Japan have a different myth, in which a bird

131 Nornally, a male symbol; cf. duality of the ama.no and kuni.no kami
132 Normally, a female symbol.
plays the role of a creator of the earth out of water, just as in some Siberian and North
American Indian myths. In Japan, this recalls the creation by churning of a Reed Shoot
out of the ocean by Taka-mi-musu-bi.no kami or Kami-musu-bi.no kami and Kami-
musu-bi-[oya].no mikoto as well as that of all of Japan by Izanami and Izanagi, who
churned the ocean with a spear; this reminds of the Indian epic, where the ocean is
churned with a big mountain, Mandara. The Fins combine nearly all these versions in a
single story.
The Japanese creation myth thus is positioned somewhere between a rather old
Indo-European and Near Eastern version (primordial sea) and the widespread motif
of a shaky, floating earth found with some Siberian, American Indian, but also with
Chinese and Indian myths.
However, it is not very close to the particular form the creation myth take in
China, with the "breaths" separating thus forming heaven and earth, nor with the Ainu
myth of a bird creating the earth, nor with the Polynesian myth of a primordial god Io
who begins the sequence. Incidentally, all versions, including the "typical Japanese one"
of churning the ocean are present in old Indian mythology.
The actual start of the creation sequence, thus is difficult to establish, even when
limited to Laurasian mythology. However, it is methodologically important that some
of the spatially and temporally very distant mythologies, such as those of Polynesia,
Egypt, Israel, as well as those of the Omaha and Maya, agree more with each other
than with those of their neighbors. This discovery is significant. Just as in the spread of
languages, certain motifs seen in individual myths and in Laurasian mythology in
general have been preserved at diverse ends of the world, and it frequently is not the
immediate neighbors that are most closely linked, whether in myth or in language.133
Isolated, 'bizarre' features found in two distant areas usually are a sure hint at
something old, and older, now lost structure, myth or mytheme.134
It must be underlined, again, that the mythologies of Sub-Saharan Africa, the
Andamans, New Guinea/Melanesia and Australia do not show most of the creation
myths discussed above, especially that of initial creation of the universe135 which is
very important in view of the basic similarities and agreements in Laurasian
mythologies, and their common origin.

§ 4. Conclusion : The meaning of Eurasian mythology

.

133 The same holds also for genetics.

134 As in historical linguistics, comparisons are made more probable by using isolated, unmotivated
similarities in grammatical features, usually remnants of an older, now lost part of the Indo-European
system.
135 See for example Dixon (1916: 105) “Apparently one of the clearest characteristics of the mythology of
the Melanesian area is the almost total lack of myths relating to the origin of the world. With one or two
exceptions, the earth seems to be regarded as having always existed in very much the same form as
today.” Or, for Central Africa, H. Hochegger (2005) sums up: “... Congolese creation myths do not seek to
explain, for example, the creation of heaven and earth (cosmology). Nor do they tell us about how man
and women were made. The focus of mythological interest is on the concrete questions of human life...
What, in the end, is creation? ...it is simply the beginning of the concrete situation that continue into the
present. There is hardly any notion here of an ancient source of all things, placed at the beginning of a long
history understood in linear fashion.” (my italics).
 However, once we take the complex contents of the Laur. 'novel' seriously, it is
obvious that it tells the story from the "birth" of the Universe until its "death" (and its
eventual rebirth). In other words, it takes its inspiration from something that is very
close to human experience: the human life cycle. It sums up our experience in life, our
growing up from childhood through teen, middle and old age, and it expresses the
ineffaceable wish for something positive to happen after this life, -- a new life or a
rebirth, however it might be shaped.
In doing so, the Laur. novel enumerates the gradual stages of the world, from
an emergence out of chaos to the appearance of human beings and of the oikumene,
and to that of society and culture. It answers, thus, in an encoded and shrouded way
and on a symbolic and metaphoric level, the question why we are here?
The Laurasian story line from therefore is a metaphor of the human condition,
of human life from mysterious beginning and its threatening end. The genial stroke of
the creator of Laurasian mythology was that it correlates136 and thus explains the
universe and the human condition: from where we come, why we are here, and where we
will go. Laurasian myth is a metaphor applied to everything around us, the world and
the divine powers that govern it.
Laur. “ideology” thus seems to be based on a fairly simple idea, but someone,
some forty thousand years ago, had to come up with it first. Apparently, the new
concept was so obvious and fascinating to a large section of the emigrants Out of
Africa, the Eurasian sub-group group (excluding those adhering to Gondwana
mythologies) that the basic idea has persisted in various guises and has deep resonance
and meaning even for us today.
Yet, there is more to the Laurasian novel. Its myths works on many levels, as
good myths (or rituals, poems, epics, sculptures or paintings, or even music) should
indeed do. The “translation” of human experience into myth is based on analogies and
on homologies: "the sky is shaped just like a human skull" or "in the beginning the
world was an egg that split open..." The establishment of such correlations and
homologies has been explained (Farmer et al. (2000) by overextension of social
categories to the universe, or the tendency to build the kinds of anthropomorphic (or
animistic) models of the world seen in early mythological (or "religious") models of the
world, all of which are a natural outgrowth of well-known features of brain structure
and its early development.

The universe developed, as mentioned, from the mixture of sweet and salty
waters (corresponding to blood and sperm, in Mesopotamia), to an undefined (or egg-
like) shape, which may have given rise or may have reinforced the idea of the
universe as stemming from an egg. This is followed by a birth as primordial giant or as
the first pair of twins(?), father heaven/mother earth. The bipolar and bisexual world
grew 'stronger' --and older-- with the ensuing generations of the gods, through the
elimination of monsters, through the creation of culture and the emergence of human
beings who sustain their ancestors, the gods.
Laurasian mythology makes a clear, intelligent distinction --as seen in the
Japanese case-- between the first amorphous, vegetative origins of the universe and the
later, structured, bisexual, dichotomy-like world of gods, of nature, of humans and
human culture. The obvious bi-sexual nature of living beings, from fish and reptiles to

136 See Farmer et al. 2000.

apes and human beings, also explains the nature of the universe, of humans and of the
dichotomy of cultural constructions.
Many items in human experience and myth are indeed expressed in a
dichotomous, bi-polar fashion: such as those of birth/death, father heaven/mother
earth, male/female sections of a clan or of a settlement, simple dual social structure of
leaders and followers, applicable even to a hunter/gatherer society; or that of culture
versus nature (Lévi-Strauss' cooked : uncooked), of 'wild' versus 'civilized', of 'human'
versus 'animalistic', and so on.
Laurasian Mythology views the workings of the universe and human society in
a coherent, orderly and harmonic way (ta, aša, li., ma'at, etc.) There is a universal
underlying positive, ordering force at work at affects humans as well as the gods and
the universe.
All is woven into a complex, well-built structure with many levels of
meaningful tales, a 'novel' that explains our origins, nature and culture, in a complex,
interwoven picture of 'logical' structure, and therefore offers a satisfying 'explanation'
of the world in which we live of our own nature and fate.
Finally, Laurasian mythology offer a satisfying answer to the typical Laurasian
questions of "from where, how, why?" Laurasian mythology does so in the framework
familiar to early humans, that of human life, of birth and death, of four generations
and of clan interaction. This must have been its persistent appeal to so many peoples of
Eurasia and the Americas (and the inroads it has made into many African societies).

Beyond Laurasia

In constructing the complex Laurasian mythology story line, its authors have
made a selection of much older Gondwana and, indeed, of Pan-Gaean tales. However,
both the Laurasian as well as the African, Andamanese, Papua and Australian
populations look back to a common history of more than a hundred thousand years.
The latter have retained the pre-Laurasian, largely unstructured, loose arrangement as
well as much of content of the original Pan-Gaean tales.
However, each one of the groups among the Gondwana and the Laurasian
societies have made use of a large amount of prior mythology and they both have
selected certain items, stressed others, (re)-created certain (new) features and
structures to fit their own time and cultural pattern.

One must, however, ask: why does myth persist at all? Apparently it is
something inherently human, or at least inherent in Homo Sapiens sapiens, and maybe
also in Neanderthals. This is not to say that it is “inborn” such as Chomsky and his
followers maintain for speech or rather the faculty of language in humans.
A recent example of a powerful new myth was the rise of Nazi mythology, as
depicted in Rosenberg's confused Der Mythos des 20. Jahrhunderts (Rosenberg 1982).
As Cassirer (1946) put it “[myth] was regulated and organized; it was adjusted to
political needs and used for political end” (1946: 235). Apart from the fact that myth
often has played this role, especially in all kinds of state societies, this judgment also
applies to other recent emanations of myth.
Myth reasserts itself even in societies that do away with all traditional culture,
such as the former Soviet Union or communist Korea or China: merely, new myths or
versions of existent myths are created. “They were brought into being by the word of
command of the political leaders (Cassirer 1946: 235-6). Myth also is very potent right
 th
now in America: “the end is coming”, a myth based on a recent, 19 century
interpretation of the last book of the Christian Bible, Revelation, that --ironically-- has
strong, Zoroastrian-based Iranian relations. This belief does not only stronlgy influence
the worldview of much of the population but, dangerously, also that of current
th
politicians who already carry the heavy burden of the dominant 19 century myths
(“the manifest destiny” of “god's own country”).

However, what unites us all --politics, religions, and cultures apart-- is the
same old question, put in so many deferent ways. In the end, apart from the Sciences,
it is not the typical Laurasian one, treated at length in this paper, “where does the
earth come from”, but the truly human question: “Where do we come from and where
do we go?” The answer to this universal question has been given by many cultures but,
as the ever evolving explanations show, the question remains perpetually open. Our
oldest forebears of Pan-Gaean and Laurasian times were stuck with the same
unanswered query and quest that we still are.
It is moving to observe that they, a hundred thousand years ago, tried very
hard to give an answer in myth and ritual. Observing and utilizing elements of their
natural surroundings, they postulated that humans develop just like the vegetation
and animals they saw around them. All mythological thinking, after all, develops by
analogy and correlation, just as much of human thought in general, and --though we
often forget that-- even scientific thought. As did the present paper.

-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

REFERENCES

Aston, W.G. Nihongi. Chronicles of Japan from the Earliest Times to A.D. 697. Rutland:
Tuttle 1972 [1896]

Beckwith, C. I. Koguryo, The Language of Japoan's Continental Relatives. Leiden: Brill

2004

Beckwith, M. Hawaiian Myth. New Haven:Yale 1940

Berezkin, Y. Dwarfs and Cranes. Baltic Finnish Mythologies in Eurasian and American
Perspective. 70 years after V. Toivonen. Paper presented at a conference at Tartu

Bierhorst, J. The Mythology of North America. New York: William Morrow 1986

van Binsbergen, W. paper at the Conference 'Myth and the disciplines' Leiden 12 Dec,
2004, see:
http://www.shikanda.net/ancient_models/leopard/leopardwww.htm, cf.
http://www.shikanda.net/topicalities/kyoto/kyoto.htm

Campbell, J. Historical Atlas of World Mythology. Vol. I. The way of the animal powers.
Part 1: Mythologies of the primitive hunter and gatherers. New York: Harper & Row.
1988

Bodde, D. Myths of Ancient China, in: S. N. Kramer, Mythologies of the Ancient

World, New York: Doubleday 1961

Bosch, F.D.K. The golden germ: an introduction to Indian symbolism. 's Gravenhage:
Mouton 1960.

Brighenti, F. Buffalo Sacrifice and Tribal Mortuary Rituals, 2003, see:

http://www.svabhinava.org/friends/FrancescoBrighenti/BuffaloSacrifice-frame.html;
[longer version]: Sacrificio di bovini, rituale funerario e culto degli antenati nelle
culture tribali dell'India e del sudest asiatico, 2003, see:
http://www.svabhinava.org/friends/FrancescoBrighenti/SacrificioBovini-frame.html

Cassirer, E. Philosphie der symbolischen Formen, Band II. Das mythische Denken. 1925,
Engl. 1955.

Chang, K. C. Art, myth, and ritual :ńthe path to political authority in ancient China.
Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press 1983

Dixon, R. Oceanic mythology. Boston: Marshall Jones 1916

Doniger, W. Review of: C. Ginsburg, Deciphering the Witches' Sabbath. New York :
Pantheon Books. In: The New York Times Book Review, July 14, 1991: 3, 26

Doty, W. Mythography. The Study of Myths and Rituals. Mythography. Tuscaloosa: The
University of Alabama Press 1986
---, Mythography. The Study of Myths and Rituals. Tuscaloosa and London: The
University of Alabama Press 2000

Eliade, M. From Primitives to Zen, New York: Harper & Row 1977 [reprinted as:
Essential Sacred Writings from around the World, San Francisco: Harper 1992]

Farmer, S., J.B. Henderson, M. Witzel. Neurobiology, Layered Texts, and Correlative
Cosmologies: A Cross-Cultural Framework for Premodern History." Bulletin of the
Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities (BMFEA) 72, 2000 [2002] 48-90

Feldman, B. and R. D. Richardson. The Rise of modern Mythology 1680-1860. Indiana

University Press 1972

Findeisen, H. Dokumente urtümlicher Weltanschauung der Völker Nordasiens.

Oosterhout: Anthropological Publications 1970

Fornander, A. An Account of the Polynesian Race; Its origins and Migrations, and the
ancient history of the Hawaiian people to the times of Kamehameha I., 3 vols., London:
Trubner 1879-1885; repr. Rutland: Tuttle 1969

A. Fornander, An Account of the Polynesian Race; Its origins and Migrations, 3 vols.,
London 1880, vol. 1 221-

Frobenius, L. Atlantis. Volskmärchen und Volkksdichtungen Afrikas. [Repr.] Nendeln:

Kraus 1978

Gurney, O. R. The Hittites. Harmondsworth: Penguin 1952 [1976]

Haas, V. Hethitische Bergötter und hurritische Steindämonen: Riten, Kulte und Mythen:
eine Einführung in die altkleinasiatischen religiösen Vorstellungen. Mainz: Zabern 1982

Hastings, J. (ed.) Encyclopaedia of religion and ethics, edited by James Hastings. With the
assistance of John A. Selbie and other scholars. Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark; New York:
Scribner 1928

Hatt, G. The corn mother in America and Indonesia. Anthropos 46, 1951, 853-914

Herbert, J. La cosmogonie Japonaise. Paris: Hervy 1977

Hermann Hochegger, Congolese Myths about Beginnings. Variations from 1906 to

1994. Translated from French by Timothy D. Stabell. Mödling: Antenne d'Autriche
2005 see:
(http://www.ceeba.at/myth/myths_of_the_beginnings.htm)

Hoffmann, K. Mårtåa und Gayōmart, Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 11,

1957, 85-103 [Repr. in: Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik, Wiesbaden 1975/6: 422-438; Engl.
transl. in: Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik, Wiesbaden 1992: 715-732)

Ions, V. Egyptian Mythology, Library of the World's Myths and Legends, 1990 [1982]

Irwin, J. The sacred Anthill and the Cult of the Primordial Mound, History of
Religions, 22.2, 339-360;

Jensen, A.E., Hainuwele. Frankfurt: Klostermann 1939; New York: Arno Press 1978
---, Jensen, A.E. Die drei Ströme. Leipzig: Harrassowitz 1948
---, Die getötete Gottheit. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1968

Jongewaard, C. Woven Time in Andean Textiles. Paper given at the Colloquium on

Andean Indigenous Cultures today, Centre for Latin American Linguistic Studies, St.
Andrews. 1986

Kant, I. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. 1781 = Würzburg: Meiner 1956: 728

Kirk, G.S. Myth. Its meaning and functions in ancient and other cultures. London:
Cambridge University Press / Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Californai Press
1970.

N. Kramer, Mythologies of the Ancient World, New York: Doubleday 1961

Kumulipo. An account of the creation of the world according to Hawaiian tradition.
Transl. by Queen Liliuokalani. Boston: Lee and Shepard 1897

Kuiper, F.B.J. An Austro-Asiatic myth in the RV. Amsterdam : Noord-Hollandsche

Uitg. Mij. 1950
---, Ancient Indian Cosmology. J. Irwin, (ed.). Delhi : Vikas 1983
---, Aryans in the Rigveda, Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi 1991

Lai, E.W. (personal comm. Feb 2004)

Lehmann-Nitsche. R. Studien zur südamerikanischen Mythologie, die ätiologischen

Motive. Hamburg: Friederichsen, de Gruyter 1939: 115

Lincoln, B. Myth, Cosmos, and Society, Cambridge: Harvard 1986

McCaskill, D. (ed.) Amerindian Cosmology. Brandon, Manitoba: The Canadian

Journal of Native Studies 1987 [= Cosmos 4: Yearbook of the Traditional Cosmology
Society]

Maspero, M.H. Légendes mythologiques dans le Chou King, Journal asiatique 204,
1924.

Matsumoto, N. Essai sur la mythologie japonaise, Paris 1928

---, Nihon shinwa no kenkyū. Tokyo: Shibundo 1956

Matsumura, K. Myth Theories and War. Talk at the XIXth World Congress of the
International Association for the History of Religions, Tokyo 2005

Mathieu, R. Anthologie des mythes et légendes de la Chine ancienne. Paris: Gallimard

1989

Moerenhout, J.A. Voyage aux Iles du Grand Océan. Paris 1837 [transl., A. Fornander,
An Account of the Polynesian Race; Its origins and Migrations. London 1880

Orans, M. The Santal. A tribe in search of a great tradition. Detroit: Wayne State
University Press 1965

Philippi, D.L. Kojiki. Translated with an Introduction and Notes. Tokyo: University of
Tokyo Press 1968

Philippi, D.L. Norito. A translation of the ancient Japanese ritual prayers. Princeton:
Princeton University Press 1990

Puhvel, J. Comparative Mythology. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins

University Press 1987

Raffetta, P. On the Creation of Domestic Animals in Proto-Indo-European Mythology,

paper presented at the conference "Pecus: Man and Animal in Antiquity," Swedish
Institute, Rome, September 2002 (see:
http://www.svabhinava.org/friends/PaolaRaffetta/CreationDomesticAnimals-
frame.html.)

Rosenberg, A. Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts. [English transl.] Torrance: Noontide

Press 1982

Sherbondy, J.. El regadio, los lagos y los mitos de origen. Allpanchis XVII, No. 20, 1982,
3-32

Soisson, P. & J. La vie des Aztèques dans l'ancien Mexique, Paris: Minerva 1987

Sproul B.C. Primal Myths. Creation Myths around the world. San Francisco: Harper
1991

Thompson, S. Motif Index of folk-literature. A classification of narrative elements in

folk-tales, ballads, myths, fables, mediaeval romances, exempla, fabliaux, jest-books, and
local legends. Bloomington Indiana 1932-36 [2 n d ed. 1966; computer file,
Blomington: Indiana University Press/Clayton: InteLex corp. 1993

Villems, R. Genetics and Mythology -- an unexplored field. Presentation at the VIIth

ESCA Round Table, Kyoto, June 8, 2005

Watkins, C. How to kill a dragon: aspects of Indo-European poetics. New York: Oxford
University Press 1995

Witzel, M. Sur le chemin du ciel. Bulletin des Etudes indiennes, 2, 1984, 213-279.

---, The case of the shattered head. Festschrift für W. Rau, Studien zur Indologie und
Iranistik 13/14, 1987, 363-415

---, Early Sources for South Asian Substrate Languages,ò Mother Tongue (extra number)
1999 [cf.: EJVS version: http://users.primushost.com/~india/ejvs/issues.html]

---, Comparison and Reconstruction: Language and Mythology." Mother Tongue VI,
2001, 45- 62

---, The
gvedic Religious System and its Central Asian and Hindukush Antecedents.
A. Griffiths & J.E.M. Houben (eds.). The Vedas: Texts, Language and Ritual.
Groningen: Forsten 2004: 581-636

---, Vala and Iwato. The Myth of the Hidden Sun in India, Japan, and beyond.
Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies 12-1, 2005, 1-69

---, Out of Africa: The journey of the oldest tales of humankind, given at the
Conference on Generalized Sciences: Peaceful World and enriching Lives, Tokyo March
17, 2005
---, Origins (working title), forthc.