دون ژوان اتو رنک بخشهای ۶ و ۷
دون ژوان اتو رنک بخشهای ۶ و ۷
CHAPTER 6
THE PRIMAL FATHER AND AVENGING DEATH
IF WE believe that the legend of the flesh-eating Demon of Death who avenges the primal crime can be recognized in the Stone Guest figure of the Don Juan legend, then the question is raised of how such an interpretation is related both to our previous explanation of the figure as conscience and also to the Don Juan motif itself. We shall find the answers to both questions in human prehistory and its vestiges in the later traditions.
The demon of death, who returns from the grave to devour the guilty, is nothing other than the personification of the pangs of conscience, which as such betray their origin in the primal act of parricide. The anxiety about the return of the father and his particular revenge (devouring), which is reduced by the different burial customs, can be explained as anxiety about retaliation, arising from a sense of guilt. The totem meal, which Freud's interpretation has illuminated as a theme that survives in the idea of sacrificial food, the Last Supper ("Take and eat; this is my body"), and the funeral banquet, ultimately finds its prehistoric prototype in the devouring of the father who was collectively slain. Such an hypothesis, which appears repellent to our sensitivities, is confirmed not only by the fact of cannibalism, but by a series of very special ethnological customs. Thus Herodotus (Histories, III, 38) reports that the Callatiae (an Indian people) eat their fathers. Among the Massagetae (I, 216), relatives kill a person who grows very old along "with beasts of the flock besides, then they boil the flesh and feast on it. This is held to be the best sort of death."1 One can try to render these customs more understandable if one recognizes that they are based on deeply rooted superstitions that survive in religion.2 Primitive man consumes certain parts of an animal in order to appropriate its strength. He also believes that he appropriates the powers of the mighty primal father for himself in the same way, by eating certain parts of the body. Any anxiety that the slain person might return to avenge his murder is, moreover, quite effectively checked by the radical manner of his destruction, and also by the identification that is symbolized by eating.8 Of course, neither the destruction nor the identification through eating achieves the intended result, Ior at this point there emerges a sense of guilt that cannot be placated. For while the primitive death rite achieves the quickest possible destruction of the body by means of eating (although not without leaving some traces), it also creates and strengthens an immaterial, mysterious sense of guilt. In the mythic and religious traditions, this guilt feeling continually seeks exoneration and justification, even when the body of the slain person is completely and utterly annihilated by fire, the sense of guilt finds no peace. For the eternally living sense of guilt even allows the body to be "devoured" by the flames, and through this process of material refining the detached "soul" is set free. This soul persists as the invisible enemy in the animistic superstition, as it does in the neurotic symptoms until it is transmuted into scientific consciousness by psychoanalysis.
From one of the early phases of the primordial struggle against this materialized conscience, a series of Greek myths is derived in which the motif of dismembering is closely related to that of killing and devouring of men. Because I have already discussed these traditions—of Pelops, Aureus, Thyestes, Harpagos, and others—in another place (Rank, 1912, pp. 283-97, 3�9_I9 especially), I am content to note here that they characteristically involve children who are set as food before the father. The Greek cosmology of Cronos, who devoured his children and who was castrated by his youngest son Zeus,4 displaces the tradition to a prehistoric era but reproduces it in its full, unretouched crudeness. 5 Yet the Cronos myth is a heroic revision of the Egyptian Osiris myth, which at certain points is more primitive. In this myth, Osiris, who is sexually favored by his sister Isis, is killed by his brother acting together with a number of helpers (14 or 26 or 72 [according to different versions]). They divide the body of Osiris into the appropriate number of pieces. According to Diodor,8 the brother gives a piece of the body of Osiris to each of his 26 accomplices in order to diminish their individual guilt; but no one will take the phallus—clearly the symbol of principal guilt. As a very special part of the body, this also has a special fate: it is permanently lost, the underlying intention7 being that a fish should devour it. Meanwhile the sense of guilt, in the form of a fantasied wish, brings all of the remaining parts together into a whole body again—as often occurs in stories of this type. Perhaps this compensatory reaction to primitive dismemberment preserves the mythic expression of a step of cultural evolution, in which the Egyptians moved from devouring their dead to the reverent custom of embalming, which protects that very corpse from "being devoured" chemically.
The theme of the many collaborators in the primal crime appears in the earliest traces of the Osiris myth. In the later hero myths, these collaborators are absent and are replaced by one person—the youngest [of them] — who often plays the role of the aristocratic braggart [Junker Prahlhans] in our [German language] stories. By comparing the Egyptian Osiris legend with the Greek Cronos myth, we can apprehend the entire course of the heroic re-working of the original material, although we are convinced that the Egyptian version does not reproduce the primordial history unchanged. In the Osiris version, the primal father [figure] was attacked by the horde for reasons of sexual jealousy; he was dismembered and, we may suppose, devoured. In the later traditions this dismemberment happens only to the phallus. In the Greek version, the father god is deceived during the sex act and only castrated (the phallus is thrown into the sea), for the noteworthy reason that "he first thought of doing shameful things" (Theogony, lines 167-68). This reason alludes to the father's suspecting the danger in his sons and either preventing their birth or else devouring them immediately after birth. Here we find the first hint of justification of the primal crime against the father, that he was reproached with having devoured his own sons. This need for justification—in connection with the role of the woman in the heroic tradition [see Chapter 7]—leads us to conclude, with Freud, that heroic poetry is in fact a false re-working of reality in the sense that it is a fantasied wish.8
As the most widely known example of this total reversal in fantasy, we mention the numerous stories of ogres found among both primitive and civilized peoples. The story is familiar to us as the popular Tom Thumb [Daumling] tale. Tom Thumb and his brothers were cast out of their parents' house. In the wild forest, they came toward evening to the house of a giant ogre who was not at home. His sympathetic wife hid them. When the giant came home, he scented the prey with the wellknown exclamation, "I smell human flesh!" With some effort, the wife was able to gain a respite until the next morning for her charges. During the night, however, the monster came into the bedroom to cut the throats of the seven brothers. Because of a cunning trick of Tom Thumb, he killed his own seven daughters instead. The brothers fled. Tom Thumb took the Seven-League Boots of the ogre with him, an act which corresponds not only to a castration of the primal father, but also to an identification with him. This version has preserved a trace of the transformation [of the original], in that the youngest son is set off from the horde of brothers in the shape of a phallus (Tom Thumb); the more usual story tradition indicates that only one person, the hero, is concealed and "saved" by the woman in the same way as the phallus was concealed and "saved" by the loving goddess Isis.9 That the fantasy does not take offense at such an ignominious role for the hero is explained by the sexual motivation that is symbolically displayed in this fantasy— breaking in, concealment by the woman, and deception of the giant. We still have to consider the role of the woman; here we only want to suggest that the whole fantasy recalls the Freudian interpretation, whereby:
in the lying poetic fancies of prehistoric times the woman, who had been the prize of battle and the temptation to murder, was probably turned into the active seducer and instigator to the crime. (Freud, 1921, p. 136)
Concerning the origin and role of the ogre, we consider Naumann (1921, p. 45 ) wrong when, in agreement with Schoning (1903), he explains the giant as a corpse-demon, enlarged by fantasy to the proportions of a giant. Clearly, the psychological connection between the demon and the giant can only be that both are personifications of the all-powerful, brutal primal father. In both forms he is essentially dangerous; the difference is only that the corpse-demon who devours the living appears to the guilt feelings of the murderers as revenging his own "feast," while the giant ogre corresponds to a justification fantasy of the hero, who pretends to expiate an earlier crime of the father by means of the primal act ("He first thought of doing shameful things").
We can instruct ourselves about the further meaning of this ogre fantasy, and especially about the role played by the woman, by drawing on similar traditions of primitive peoples as collected by Frobenius (1904). The role of the woman as helper—often completely without motivation—is usually explained by her being the wife (or sister) of the hero, who had previously been abducted by the giant and who is now possessed by him. The hero sets out to rescue her from the power of the primal father, so that his action is justified (as for example among the Tibetan Mongols, in the fourth chapter of the Bogda Gesser Chan).10 According to Frobenius, the death of the ogre (giant) occurs either through the swallowing of white-hot stones (as we know from the Cronos myth and the story of Little Red Riding Hood), 11 through turning to stone (the Stone Guest of the Don Juan legend), or through dismembering (the devouring motif). Frobenius also includes here the Indo-European Polyphemus legend. He characterizes this ogre-type in a way that fully corresponds to our analytical reconstruction: Ogres are cave-dwellers, who have a definite temporal place in the history of the origin of the world. Often they appear as a group, although the hero usually struggles with only one. Always there is only one woman. Generally, she does not belong to the race of ogres, since she helps the hero who is sheltered in the cave—often even to the point of killing the ogres. In the end, this "old helper,"12 as Frobenius calls her, turns out to be the mother of the hero (for example in Lapland); but if she is young, then the hero carries her off as a virginal maid and marries her.
According to our hypothesis, this mythical role of the woman cannot have been the original one. The legendary wishful fantasy (in Freud's sense) presupposes that the sexual object was already bound to the heroic youngest son as a helper, while in fact she was first obtained with difficulty through the removal of the old man. Originally, the woman apparently had to be subdued, just like the jealous father; for after his murder she would obviously protect the freedom that she had thereby won. Thus we can explain the fact that in some isolated traditions, the woman who became the "old helper" of the hero myths appears as a partisan of the giants. Here she is herself an ogre who summons her mate to devour the hero-guest.13 This "bad old woman" survives in the figure of the Devil's grandmother14 and also in the Raven Mother of so many mythic traditions. Her role in stories has become that of the witch or the bad stepmother. But how did the mother take on this hostile role?
CHAPTER 7
THE DON JUAN LEGEND AS HEROIC DISTORTION
WE HAVE certainly come rather far from the theme of Don Juan and his adversary the Stone Guest, but we have moved in the direction of the heroic legends of prehistory because we can regard the Don Juan fantasy as their most extreme development. Don Juan is the audacious blasphemer, who would deny conscience, guilt feelings, and anxiety with a cynicism that surpasses anything in the heroic tradition. He stifles his dread of the flesh-eating primal father's revenge with an unelicited invitation to a mirthful banquet. Yet on the other hand, he openly admits the primal crime; according to our interpretation, this must be contrasted to the otherwise heroic portrait. Freed from all burden of guilt, the Don Juan figure can permit himself, as it were, to acknowledge the primitive instinctual roots of the primal crime without extenuating motives. He can admit, moreover, that the father was murdered for reasons of base sensuality rather than from a desire to rescue the beloved woman from oppression.
Thus the surpassing greatness of the Don Juan figure is that he has done away with the heroic lie. He removes the men in order to possess the women. He knows no ideal motives, no sentimentalities and rationalizations. He has preserved the heroic character only in the one essential point that keeps him from being identified as a common criminal: he stands alone—alone against a world of opponents, and alone against an underworld full of dangers. As in the case of the heroic poet, he cannot use the help of brothers in the primal deed. He will not divide the booty of women with them afterwards, but rather will possess each one for himself alone. Each time anew he overcomes another awesome primal father, who had not permitted any higher stage of social organization.1 His tragedy, and finally his death, come from this complete identification with the tyrannical father; for he himself is now pursued by the steadily growing band of avengers, just as the primal father was pursued by the horde [of brothers]. Finally he succumbs to the narcissistically determined anxiety about retaliation which always arises from such an identification.
Now in terms of the heroic fantasy portrait, it is noteworthy that the very point that makes our hero a hero, and that constitutes his special characteristic, also causes him to slip into the lying exaggeration of the typical story hero. He does establish the individual, heroic ego —the ego ideal—for the horde of brothers; and while he does not multiply and exaggerate the primal deed, as do the ancient heroes in their heroic deeds, he does exaggerate and multiply his desired success—the number of women of the primal horde whom he conquers. The thousand and three women whom he substitutes for the one conquered woman of the heroic myths betray the lying character of this wish fantasy by illustrating its exaggeration in another extreme direction. Nevertheless, we can still discern here a fragment of the primitive situation. While he puts one fearless hero (namely Himself) in place of the many helpers, at the same time he also puts many women in place of the one woman. Here we can see the mechanism by which the trait that really characterizes Don Juan [i.e., the series of women] could arise: through the most extreme alteration, the poet has made a horde of women out of the horde of brothers. The serial form of female sexual objects thus arises from a wish-fulfilling transformation of the harassing clan of brothers.2
This explains why the original Don Juan is no darling of women, but rather a seducer, partly by force and partly through cunning, who does not shrink from using any weapon, so that he really struggles against the women as he does against the men. Here the woman plays anything but the heroic role of helper; on the contrary, she is the real pursuer and avenger of his crime.
Thus the Don Juan fantasy appears to confirm our conjecture that in prehistory the son certainly did not have the help of the mother in vanquishing the father. If we take the conjecture seriously, we must rather admit that the hero also had to struggle against the mother figure—sometimes even until she also perished. The hero's victory was complete when, after eliminating the obstructive primal father, he succeeded in possessing the woman sexually. How hard he had to struggle for this possession is readily evidenced by the many female monsters of myth—from the Babylonian primal mother Tiamat3 and the Sphinx,4 to the presumably female vampires of modern Greece; from the overpoweringly dangerous female figures of the legends of Judith8 and Briinhildee to Isolde, who expresses the archetype of female revenge in Wagner's violent poem:
As the men are all at peace with Tristan, Who is there left to strike him down? {Tristan und Isolde, act i, scene 6)7
As to the motive for this negative attitude of the woman, which so strongly contradicts our heroic ideal and its romantic caricature, we can only venture some conjectures based on the few fragments of distorted tradition and analytic insight. Nevertheless, these conjectures are broadly related to psychological truths.
As we learn most vividly from the psychology of the neuroses, the woman continues to have strong IibidinaI ties to the primal father in spite of all her aversion to his brutal domination. Although she may greatly admire his successor, she is understandably not inclined to lose again to him the freedom that she won through the father's violent death. Actually there is no direct successor to the father from among the horde of brothers, since there are no "heroes." On the contrary, according to Freud's hypothesis,8 the woman acceded to a dominant position because of the mutual opposition of the "brothers," and she obviously sought to consolidate this position (as by Mother Right, or the Rule of Women).9 We see traces of this situation even today, for example, in the Chinese law that on the death of the father the mother steps out of her silent role into the highest position that a woman can obtain anywhere (Krause, 1922).10 If the ancestor worship did not pass by her to the son, one could say that she steps into the position of the father himself; but in any case she acquires rights to dispose of the persons and the possessions of the children that are identical to those of the father.
Perhaps we may conjecture here that like the "hero," the "mother" as such did not exist in prehistory; rather, that she appeared at a particular moment when one of the many relatively undifferentiated women of the primal horde opposed the brothers and established that she alone should possess the power that had belonged to the father. As a consequence of the primal act, those individual relationships or sentiments that we later find consolidated in the concepts of "father" and "mother" would first crystallize, as it were, out of group psychology. The slain man, whose killing was [later] regretted, furnishes the psychological content of the father concept; the desired and unattainable woman, that of the mother relationship. Probably the woman who progressed psychologically into the mother role also owed this advance to an active sympathy [of the son]. She may well have been a kind of favorite of the slain one, perhaps even a wife. Because she became annoyed at later neglect, her negative feelings toward the ruthless chief of the horde were aroused, so that she protected one of the sons from the persecution of her terrible mate in order to raise him up as her liberator and avenger. Such an "anaclitic" attachment (in Freud's sense) may perhaps constitute the first nucleus of a mother-son relationship in the sense of individual psychological development as well as that of prehistory. To the protected son, such an attachment may also have suggested that he had a preferred position, so that he was inspired and capable of taking up the struggle against the father and enduring it. Thus while the son acts from clearly libidinal motives, the motives of the woman are strongly ambivalent from the beginning. She always remains libidinally fixated on the primal father, yet on the other hand, she desires the more potent younger [son]. She can submit to this son, however, only if he is successfully identified with the primal father, as in the heroic fantasy. In reality, none of the "brothers" is able to assume the full role of the father at first. Thus although the woman is perhaps no longer altogether attractive sexually, the way is open for her to use the "revolutionary" son as merely an instrument to win the power position of the "mother" for herself as a female revolutionary. As a sign of the paternal power—as the sceptor of the libido, so to speak—the father's phallus appears in the mythic traditions. This is possible because, as the traditions clearly admit, it has been devoured and only survives in a substitute form (see Rank, 1913). The phallus cult that reigned throughout the ancient world is the residue of this female idol, for the woman demanded worship of it in the name of the primal father.
What is the explanation for this special significance of the phallus in the history of religion and cults? We may conjecture that the penis (along with the nourishing warm blood of the slain person, in the vampire beliefs) was the member that the woman herself secured at the terrible totem feast; this she did because of her sexual
role. This is suggested by traditions such as the Egyptian one of Isis, who was fertilized by the devoured phallus, even after the death of her consort and by the corresponding custom of the "death marriage" (Naumann, 1921, p. 38; [Schrader, 1904]). Further support comes from the belief in fertilization through the mouth, a belief that is common in fairy tales and that survives today in unconscious fantasies as an infantile wish. From this same root, moreover, also comes the conception of the woman with a penis, which is likewise a typical infantile sexual theory of both primitive peoples and individuals.11 In summary,12 we may say that the characteristic Don
Juan fantasy of conquering countless women, which has made the hero into a masculine ideal, is ultimately based on the unattainability of the mother and the compensatory substitute for her. As the fantasy also clearly reveals, this unattainability does not refer to sexual possession, to which there is certainly no barrier in primitive times and character.13 Rather, it involves the deeplyrooted biological wish for the exclusive and complete possession of the mother, as once experienced in the pleasure of the prenatal situation and forever afterward sought as the highest libidinal satisfaction. Since we have given a comprehensive exposition and proof of this general conception elsewhere (see Rank, 1924b), it is only necessary to note here that from this point of view, both parts of the Don Juan material show an even closer connection. The continually repeated sexual conquest of women remains unsatisfying, for the reason that the infantile tendency to regress to the mother can only be partially fulfilled. In contrast, the death complex, including being devoured again by the corpse-demon, offers the unconscious a much fuller satisfaction of this primal tendency. Xhe devouring animals of the underworld, the grave, and the coffin are clearly unambiguous mother symbols; thus in the punishment that overtakes Don Juan we have not only the expression of the deepest wishfulfillment—to behold the path of return to the mother— but also a particularly heroic fantasy portrait: the father figure, who otherwise bars access to the mother, now shows the way directly. In the figure of the Stone Guest, who also represents the coffin, appears the mother herself, coming to fetch the son.
Now in order to show that our interpretation of the Don Juan figure as one who has foundered on the mother complex is not just in the service of a predetermined opinion or psychoanalytic theory, we turn to the Don Juan versions themselves. We shall try to show how the poets have handled the role of the woman, and the extent to which they have intuitively recognized the maternal character of this role.
NOTES
1 Among many peoples even today, the custom of killing aged people to rid oneself of them survives, as among the Eskimo and the natives of Greenland. In the latter case, if the father is old and of no use, the son takes him and hangs him. Among the Chippewa of North America, the father is ejected from the home. [In version G Rank adds Koty (1934) as a reference here.] That the son has this duty of doing away with his frail and infirm father among so many peoples can only be understood as a conscious echo of the death sacrifice.
2Hirsch (1922) gives a psychological description of food aversions.
3 Cf. the "oral" dependence aspect of identification (Freud, 1921, p. zoyf.).
4 [Cronos, at the urging of his mother Gaia ("Earth"), castrated his father Uranos ("Heaven") while the latter approached Gaia. This was in revenge for Uranos' having hid all his children in the huge body of Gaia. The phallus of Uranos was thrown into the sea; from the foam that gathered about it sprang Aphrodite. (Hesiod, Theogony, lines 145-210; Rose, 1953, p. 22 summarizes the account together with variations.)
Later, Cronos produced children with his consort Rhea and swallowed them as fast as they were born. Rhea hid Zeus and in his place gave Cronos a stone wrapped in swaddling clothes to swallow. Upon reaching maturity, Zeus fought against his father Cronos. Rhea caused Cronos to vomit forth his swallowed children, and Zeus set free certain of his father's brethren who had been imprisoned by Cronos (Rose, 1953, pp. 32-44). In an earlier work (Rank, 1912, p. 269), Rank argues that this standard account of Zeus and Cronos is a distortion of the original version, which survives in the Orphic Theogony (Preller, 1887, I, p. 56, note 3), where Cronos is castrated by Zeus in the same way that Cronos castrated Uranos. Rank argues that the change was made because of the heightened anxiety about retaliation.]
5 According to Naumann's interpretation (1921, p. 70), the child-eater theme even appears in the Herod figure of the Jesus tradition. It survives and is further rationalized in the story of Ugolino related by Dante (canto 33 of The Inferno); while Gerstenberg dealt with it in a tragedy where the father, who is starving in a tower, feeds off the bodies of his children.
6 {The Library of History of Diodorus of Sicily (Diodorus Siculus, Book I, Chapter 21.]
7 [The intention, conscious or unconscious, presumably, of the person who lost it.]
8 [See Freud (1921, pp. 135-36). In the Theogony, the mother gives this "justification."]
9 [Isis wished Osiris to be honored by the Egyptians, and so she reconstituted his body. According to Diodor, she fashioned the figure of a human body from each of the various fragments, and had these artificial bodies buried in various localities. Thinking the phallus especially worthy, she had images of it made for the temples. See also Rank (1913).]
.10 [Die Ύαίεη Bogda Gesser Chan (The acts of Bogda Gesser Chan) is a religious heroic saga of the Tibetan Mongols. The German translation of 1839 by I. J. Schmidt was reissued by the Auriga Verlag, Berlin, in 1925. Rank doubtless knew of the book through Frobenius's work. Poppe (1926) gives further information about the book.]
11[It will be recalled that the original German version of this fairy tale (Rottkappchen) has Red Riding Hood swallowed by the wolf. A hunter later hears the wolf snoring and, thinking that he has devoured the grandmother, cuts open the wolf's stomach with a scissors. Red Riding Hood and the grandmother appear out of the open stomach, and they put stones into the wolf's belly. When the wolf awakes, he tries to run away, but the stones are so heavy that he collapses and falls dead. See Grimm and Grimm (1837) for the original German, and Hunt ( 1944) for a literal English translation.]
12 ["Hilfsalte." Version G has "good old woman."]
13According to Frobenius (1904, p. 381), the female cannibal tis prominent especially among the German tribes of Europe, among the Italians, and among the Africans both north and south; while the ogre predominates everywhere in the East, he is a figure that comes and goes in the West.
14 [The German term, Ellermutter, means grandmother or great-grandmother. ]
_________________________________
1 Thus as Schmitz (191?) notes, Don Juan can only exist in a country where the women must be protected by the barred windows of the harem from the inordinate desires of men, and in a country where blood-revenge holds sway over the consciousness of law. Thus the theme of constant war against the conventional world order also belongs to the Don Juan type, as Heckel (1915, p. 119) points out; without this struggle the hero would lose all justification for being.
2 This is the appropriate point to consider the homosexual components that we so often find in the Don Juan type, and that have been observed particularly by Stekel [probably Stekel (1912)]. For a genetic understanding we are indebted to Freud, who recognized as the basic presumption of the heroic orientation that one individual is detached from the homosexual Iibidinal ties of the mass: thus always the hero alone gets the woman. The arrangement in the clan of brothers entails that the same woman is possessed in common. This motif breaks through at the decisive point in the Don Juan plays, in the relationship of the hero to Leporello. It is remarkable that in his anonymous Don Juan fantasy, Holtei (1834) introduced homosexuality in the strange figure of the sculptor Johannes, who ended up mad. As the tutor of Don Juan, Johannes wished to make his pupil pliable to his own passions, but was scornfully rejected. Heckel (1915, pp. 44-45) finds a personal motive of the artist in a passage from Richard Wagner's posthumous autobiography where the composer declares that Holtei's importunate courtship of his wife was a screen motive for his homosexual inclinations (Wagner, 1911, p. 184).
3 [Heidel (1951) describes the story of Tiamat in his annotated translation of the Babylonian sacred book Εηύιηα elish (which dates from approximately 2000 B.C.). Apsu (the freshwater ocean) and Tiamat (the salt-water ocean) were the original divine parents. Distressed at his grandson Ea, Apsu resolved to destroy all his progeny; but Ea used spells and power to slay Apsu while he was asleep, and built a house and shrine for himself upon the slain grandfather.
Tiamat was spared because she was not in sympathy with Apsu's plan. Later, however, her distress was exploited by other gods, so that she was led to avenge Apsu's death. She gave birth to eleven kinds of serpent monsters and dragons, and conferred magical powers upon her new spouse. Ea grew fearful and failed to fight, for Tiamat could not be conquered by magic, but only through physical force. Marduk, his son, agreed to take up the struggle against Tiamat in return for a position of supreme and undisputed authority among the gods. He challenged Tiamat to a duel, at which she cried out in a frenzied fury. When she opened her mouth to devour Marduk, he blew in evil winds so that she could not close her mouth. Then he shot an arrow through her open mouth into her distended body; the arrow struck her heart and destroyed her life. Marduk stood on her fallen body, split open her skull with a club, cut her arteries to drain out her blood, and finally cut up the colossal body into two parts. From one part came the sky, and from the other came the earth: thus was the universe created. Tiamat's spouse was then killed in order that man, as a slave for the gods, might be made from his blood.]
4 [It will be recalled that the Sphinx was a winged figure with a human head and a lion body. By the fourteenth century B.C., the female Sphinx became common in Greece. She terrorized the people by demanding an answer to the riddle: "What has one voice, and yet becomes first four-footed, then two-footed, and lastly three-footed?" Each time the riddle was answered incorrectly, she devoured a man. Oedipus answered the riddle correctly—"Man"—at which the Sphinx killed herself, according to some traditions by throwing herself down upon the rocks. While the etymology of the word is uncertain, some scholars claim that it is related to the Greek verb "to bind" or "to squeeze," which certainly fits with the legend itself and also Rank's interpretation of the mythic female monsters. A scrap of paper in the Rank papers has the note: "The Bad Mother who devours children = Sphinx."]
5 [The story of Judith is given in the Old Testament Apocrypha book of that name. Judith, a Jewish widow, secured the confidence of Holophernes, an Assyrian general who was besieging the Jewish city of Bethulia on behalf of King Nebuchadnezzar. When alone in his tent with the drunken Holophernes, Judith cut off his head with his own sword, took the severed head in triumph to Bethulia, and thus saved the city.]
6 [Briinhilde had vowed to marry only a man of exceptional qualities. After passing all the tests, Siegfried wooed and won her, but in fact on behalf of another man. Discovering the treachery, Briinhilde exacted vengeance and death. She appears in German legends and, with emphasis on her supernatural qualities—as a Valkyrie—in Norse legends. The Niebelunglied is the most widely-known source.]
7 [In Wagner's opera, Tristan had slain Morald, to whom Isolde was bethrothed; Isolde's desire for vengeance was blocked by the gaze of Tristan's eyes. This passage occurs at the end of the boat trip by which Tristan brought her to be the wife of King Mark. Isolde had prepared for Tristan a poison, which was then exchanged for a love potion by her servant.]
8 [The possessive form and "hypothesis" was added in the manuscript of B.]
9[See Rank's Psychology and the Soul (1930); also Engels (1884) and Bachofen (1967).]
10 [This sentence seems to be based on a newspaper review of the Krause article, probably in the Neues Wiener Journal, March 23, 1922, p. 5. A fragment of this article is preserved in the Rank papers.]
11 [See Rank (1912).]
12 [These two concluding paragraphs were added in versionC.]
13 [Rank later discusses this assertion in Psychology and the Soul (1930, p. 18).]
