In such wise did the Hebrew people find expression for the consciousness of their individuality, which they might easily have utterly lost in their spiritual dependence upon their neighbours; namely, in a new interpretation of their ancient myths. When they were becoming quite Canaanitish through what they borrowed from others in religion and culture, their whole soul was again electrified, and a new spirit aroused by the feeling of self-dependence confirmed by severe contests. What it could not put into the religion, which it was powerless to create of itself, it put into a glorious series of poetical legends. These expressed both the national consciousness on the one hand, and the national passionateness on the other; and it may be assumed that with the progress of animosities the tone of the legends increased in bitterness. I adduced above the development of the Persian national legend as an instance showing how a national legend grows out of a myth. At the close of this chapter I will again revert to the same region of legend, to show how national animosity can operate in transforming old materials down to the latest times, in which new legends can scarcely be still created. Firdôsî gives the national legends of the contests with Tûrân, formed from the myths. But the lately roused antagonism of the Persians to the Arabs, who had become the dominant power and were extinguishing Iranism, also finds expression in the form which he imparts to the legends. On reading his description of the behaviour of the Arabian ambassadors at the court of Ferîdûn, we observe that the legend here takes a tone of hostility to the Arabs, and criticises the dark side of the Arabian national character; and the sufferings of Irej, the ancestor of the Iranians, are intended to be a type of the subjugation and vicissitudes of the Iranian race. Selm himself (the Shem of the Shâhnâmeh in relation to Îrân and Tûrân) is represented as malicious, passionate, and intriguing.[641] ----- Footnote 605: Palgrave gives an excellent picture of this state, in his _Central and Eastern Arabia_, I. 34: ‘The Bedouin does not fight for his home, he has none; nor for his country, that is anywhere; nor for his honour, he never heard of it; nor for his religion, he owns and cares for none. His only object in war is ... the desire to get such a one’s horse or camel into his own possession, etc.’ Footnote 606: Josephus, _Contra Apionem_, I. 14. Footnote 607: See Duncker, _Geschichte des Alterthums_, 1874, I. 253. Footnote 608: In Ezek. XXVII. 17, the wares, the export of which made the Hebrews dependent on the Phenicians, are enumerated in detail. Footnote 609: _Die Vorurtheile über das alte und neue Morgenland_, in _Abhandl. der königl. Gesellsch. der Wissensch._, Gottingen 1872, XVII. 98. Footnote 610: So _e.g._ Jas. Fergusson, _Rude Stone Monuments_, p. 38; Mommsen, _History of Rome_, 1868, II. 18 _et seq._ Footnote 611: