Comparative mythology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Comparative mythology is the academic study of different myths, in an attempt to discover how various myths and religions evolved over time, and aims to reveal relationships between distant religions, and describe their origin.
Contents |
[edit] Description
Comparative mythology is related to comparative religion. It is a field of study which is technically part of anthropology, but is more usually regarded as part of the subject of ancient history. One very well-known modern authors in this field was Joseph Campbell. Campbell is considered to be the pioneer[citation needed] of modern comparative mythology beginning with his book The Hero With a Thousand Faces[citation needed], which describes the striking similarities between hero myths in different cultures. Campbell's ideas incorporated Carl Jung's studies into the psychological phenomenon of the archetype: according to Jung, archetypes are psychological elements that all humans share through heredity; although part of the unconscious, these supposed universal archetypes influence human thought, explaining why completely different cultures have similar images in their myths.[citation needed] Many of the archteypes identified so far elicit great curiosity, such as that the god Poseidon pre-dated the concept of the Olympians, originally having been a land-based god.
Some theories in the field have a tendency to denigrate historicity of events claimed to have occurred by religions and suggest that since the idea of what is considered by the faiths as true has evolved gradually, there is no particular reason to trust the recent ideas over the older ones.[citation needed] Developments in this field are often regarded as highly controversial when they involve currently popular faiths, such as Christianity and Hinduism, because they can be seen as undermining claims of historical truth of these tenets of faith.
Despite its significance, the field of study, like ancient history as a whole, has few academics compared to other areas of research.[citation needed] In consequence, developments are slow and drawn-out and frequently suffer uncontested ridicule at the hands of religious conservatives and scholars in other fields whose theories may otherwise be damaged.[citation needed] This situation is not aided by the limited number of other academics in the field to review and constructively criticise such research as it develops.
On the other hand, the field of comparative mythology has a following in psychology and popular culture. Campbell's comparative theories have been touted and used by film maker George Lucas, poet Robert Bly, and many other modern storytellers, and have spawned several spiritual and psychological help movements, including the recent Mythopoetic men's movement.
[edit] Interpretations of myth
[edit] Pre-modern theories
The critical interpretation of myth goes back as far as the Presocratics.[1] Euhemerus was one of the most important pre-modern mythologists. He interpreted myths as accounts of actual historical events, distorted over many retellings. Although skeptical and rationalizing, such pre-modern theories were not scientific in a strict sense, for they did not rest on the foundation of the social sciences.[2]
[edit] Nineteenth-century theories
The first "scientific" theories of myth appeared during the second half of the nineteenth century.[3] In general, these nineteenth-century theories framed myth as a failed or obsolete mode of thought, often by interpreting myth as the primitive counterpart of modern science.[4]
For example, E. B. Tylor interpreted myth as an attempt at a literal explanation for natural phenomena: unable to conceive of impersonal natural laws, early man tried to explain natural phenomena by attributing souls to inanimate objects, giving rise to animism.[5]
Max Muller called myth a "disease of language". He speculated that myths arose due to the lack of abstract nouns and neuter gender in ancient languages: anthropomorphic figures of speech, necessary in such languages, were eventually taken literally, leading to the idea that natural phenomena were conscious beings, gods.[6]
The anthropologist James Frazer saw myths as a misinterpretation of magical rituals, which were themselves based on a mistaken idea of natural law. According to Frazer, man begins with an unfounded belief in impersonal magical laws. When he realizes that his applications of these laws don't work, he gives up his belief in natural law, in favor of a belief in personal gods controlling nature — thus giving rise to religious myths. Meanwhile, man continues practicing formerly magical rituals through force of habit, reinterpreting them as reenactments of mythical events. Finally, Frazer contends, man realizes that nature does follow natural laws, but now he discovers their true nature through science. Here, again, science makes myth obsolete: as Frazer puts it, man progresses “from magic through religion [or myth] to science”.[7]
By pitting mythical thought against modern scientific thought, such theories implied that modern man must abandon myth.[8]
[edit] Twentieth-century theories
Many twentieth-century theories of myth rejected the nineteenth-century theories' opposition of myth and science. In general, “twentieth-century theories have tended to see myth as almost anything but an outdated counterpart to science […] Consequently, moderns are not obliged to abandon myth for science.”[9]
Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung used their theories of analytic psychology to understand myths in a way not done before. They believed that both myths and dreams reveal unconscious psychological forces within people. For them, the literal truth or falsity of myths was not as important as the use of myths to evaluate mental health. Following Jung, Joseph Campbell believed that insights about one’s psychology, gained from reading myths, can be beneficially applied to one’s own life.
Like the psychoanalysts, Claude Levi-Strauss believed that myths reflect patterns in the mind. However, he saw those patterns more as fixed mental structures—specifically, pairs of oppositions (e.g., raw vs cooked, nature vs culture)—than as unconscious feelings or urges.[10]
In his appendix to Myths, Dreams and Mysteries, and in The Myth of the Eternal Return, Mircea Eliade attributed modern man’s anxieties to his rejection of myths and the sense of sacredness.
[edit] Earlier religions
Comparative theories generate less controversy when discussing early, non-practiced religions, and consequently much more constructive research occurs. One of the most successful developments has been the partial theoretical reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European religion, which was informed by work in the field of Proto-Indo-European language. Study of early religion of this kind is heavily connected to comparative linguistics, because the apparently distinct behaviour of gods and other figures makes it difficult to draw identifications without finding linguistic connections.
One of the first modern titles in the field was The Two Babylons, which unfortunately is more a polemic against Roman Catholicism than academic text, and many of its theories have since been overturned by subsequent research and review.[citation needed] Another early modern title was The White Goddess, in which attempts were made to draw together many goddesses from various classical cultures, claiming they developed from a single shared figure.[citation needed]
[edit] Turn-over
Much of the early work in comparative mythology has since been discarded, partly due to the discoveries of comparative linguistics, which indicate more plausible relationships. Another reason for disregarding them has been the construction of better received theories that posit gradual adaptation of gods and mythic characters.[citation needed]
Although it is tempting to completely disregard many earlier theories, it is important to note that it is only most of the works that have been discarded, whereas small parts of the texts have been supported by later, and more academic, research.[citation needed]
[edit] Fields of study
Specific comparisons:
- Buddhism and Christianity
- Christianity and Judaism
- Christianity and Islam
- Comparing Eastern and Western religious traditions
- Greek deities and their Roman and Etruscan counterparts
- Jesus Christ and mythology
[edit] Notes
[edit] References
- Segal, Robert A. Myth: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
- Frazer, Sir James George. The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1930.
[edit] Selected Bibliography
- Clifton, Dan Salahuddin, The Myth Of The Western Magical Tradition. 1998. C&GCHE
- Doniger, Wendy, The Implied Spider: Politics and Theology in Myth. 1998. New York: Columbia University Press [An introduction to comparative mythology]
- Doniger, Wendy, Splitting the Difference: Gender and Myth in Ancient Greece and India (Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion, 1996-1997: School of Oriental and African Studies University of London). 1999. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
- Dumezil, Georges The Stakes of the Warrior. 1983. Berkeley: University of California Press
- Dumezil, Georges The Plight of a Sorcerer. 1986. Berkeley: University of California Press
- Dumezil, Georges Mitra-Varuna: An Essay on Two Indo-European Representations of Sovereignty. 1988. New York:Zone Books
- Friedrich, Paul, The Meaning of Aphrodite. 1978. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
- Friedrich, Paul, Proto-Indo-European Trees: The Arboreal System of a Prehistoric People. 1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
- Jamison, Stephanie The Ravenous Hyenas and the Wounded Sun: Myth and Ritual in Ancient India . 1991. Ithaca: Cornell University Press
- Jamison, Stephanie, Sacrificed Wife / Sacrificer's Wife: Women, Ritual and Hospitality in Ancient India. 1996. New York: Oxford University Press
- Levi-Strauss, Claude Myth and Meaning. 1995. New York: Schocken Books
- Levi-Strauss, Claude, The Raw and the Cooked (Mythologiques Volume One). 1990. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
- Levi-Strauss, Claude, From Honey to Ashes (Mythologiques Volume Two). 1973. New York: Harper and Row
- Levi-Strauss, Claude, The Origin of Table-Manners (Mythologiques Volume Three). 1978. New York: Harper and Row
- Levi-Strauss, Claude The Naked Man (Mythologiques Volume Four). 1990. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
- Lincoln, Bruce Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology, and Scholarship. 1999. University of Chicago Press.
- Patton, Laurie; Doniger, Wendy (eds.), Myth and Method (Studies in Religion and Culture). 1996. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia
- Puhvel, Jaan, Comparative Mythology. 1987. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press
- White, David Gordon, Doniger, Wendy, Myths of the Dog-Man. 1991. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
