world as a whole. But when they are adopted by Hinduism they become great deities whose sphere of action is unlimited. These two conceptions, as well as their kindly and malevolent manifestations everywhere intermingle, and cannot readily be distinguished. As Bishop Whitehead remarks, to the peasant of South India they are neither exclusively evil spirits nor unmixed benefactors: they are of uncertain temper and very human in their liability to take offence.[1] It might have been expected that much help would be derived from their cult titles, a study of which has been so fruitful in explaining the Hellenic pantheon. But the most common epithets are vague—Mātā or Mā, “Mother,” Devī, “The Divine One,” or, vaguer still they are known as Grāmadevatā, “Village Godlings,” or even in north India as Dih, “The Village.” The same goddess may be, on her kindly side, Lakshmī or Srī, goddess of good fortune, now consort of Vishnu:[2] Lokamātā, “World Mother”; Āsāpurnā, “Fulfiller of Desires”; Annapūrnā, καρποφόρος, “She that fills men with grain,” or Sākambharī, “Nourisher of Herbs,” the counterpart of Demeter Chloe, goddess of young corn and other vegetation. On the other side she may be Durgā in her varied forms, or Kālī, “The Black One,” Demeter the Black, whom Mr. R. V. Russell calls a deified tigress. Some titles are purely euphemistical, based on the theory that by the use of a flattering divine name, the worshipper, if he has really learnt it, may coerce the deity to grant his desires.
Many names are pure inventions of the Brāhman officiants, many, and perhaps the most popular mark the local character of the cult.
