[222]. Zentralblatt für Psychoanalyse, II, p. 187.
[223]. The typical motive of the youthful teacher of wisdom has also been introduced into the Christ myth in the scene of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple.
[224]. Next to this, there is a female figure designated as ΚΡΑΤΕΙΑ, which means “one who brings forth” (Orphic).
[225]. Roscher: “Lexicon,” s. v. Megaloi Theoi.
[226]. Comrade—fellow-reveller.
[227]. Roscher: “Lexicon,” s. v. Phales.
[228]. Compare Freud’s evidence, Zentralblatt für Psychoanalyse, I, p. 188. I must remark at this place that etymologically penis and penates are not grouped together. On the contrary, πέος, πόσυη, Sanskrit pása-ḥ, Latin penis, were given with the Middle High German visel (penis) and Old High German fasel the significance of fœtus, proles. (Walde: “Latin Etymologie,” s. Penis.)
[229]. Stekel in his “Traumsymbolik” has traced out this sort of representation of the genitals, as has Spielrein also in a case of dementia praecox. 1912 Jahrbuch, Vol. III, p. 369.
[230]. The figure of Κράτεια, the one who “brings forth,” placed beside it is surprising in that the libido occupied in creating religion has apparently developed out of the primitive relation to the mother.
[231]. In Freud’s paper (“Psychoanalytische Bemerkungen über einen Fall von Paranoia usw.,” 1912 Jahrbuch, Vol. III, p. 68), which appeared simultaneously with the first part of my book, he makes an observation absolutely parallel to the meaning of my remarks concerning the “libido theory” resulting from the phantasies of the insane Schreber: Schreber’s divine rays composed by condensation of sun’s rays, nerve fibres and sperma are really nothing else but the libido fixations projected outside and objectively represented, and lend to his delusion a striking agreement with our theory. That the world must come to an end because the ego of the patient attracts all the rays to himself; that later during the process of reconstruction he must be very anxious lest God sever the connection of the rays with him: these and certain other peculiarities of Schreber’s delusion sound very like the foregoing endopsychic perceptions, on the assumption of which I have based the interpretation of paranoia.