Aryan lands. Our theory of the myth does not rest on etymology. We have
seen that the most renowned scholars, Max Muller, Kuhn, Roth, all analyse
the names Urvasi and Pururavas in different ways, and extract different
interpretations. We have found the story where these names were probably
never heard of. We interpret it as a tale of the intercourse between
mortal men and immortal maids, or between men and metamorphosed animals,
as in India and North America. We explain the separation of the lovers
as the result of breaking a taboo, or law of etiquette, binding among men
and women, as well as between men and fairies.

* * * * *

The taboos are, to see the beloved unveiled, to utter his or her name, to
touch her with a metal 'terrible to ghosts and spirits,' or to do some
action which will revive the associations of a former life. We have
shown that rules of nuptial etiquette resembling these in character do
exist, and have existed, even among Greeks--as where the Milesian, like
the Zulu, women made a law not to utter their husbands' names. Finally,
we think it a reasonable hypothesis that tales on the pattern of 'Cupid
and Psyche' might have been evolved wherever a curious nuptial taboo
required to be sanctioned, or explained, by a myth. On this hypothesis,
the stories may have been separately invented in different lands; but
there is also a chance that they have been transmitted from people to
people in the unknown past of our scattered and wandering race. This
theory seems at least as probable as the hypothesis that the meaning of
an Aryan proverbial statement about sun and dawn was forgotten, and was
altered unconsciously into a tale which is found among various non-Aryan
tribes. That hypothesis again, learned and ingenious as it is, has the
misfortune to be opposed by other scholarly hypotheses not less ingenious
and learned.