| Revision as of 21:41, 30 July 2013 editEdgth (talk | contribs)226 edits →Terminology: avoid repition even more by just getting to the quote that explains it more than enough← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:01, 14 December 2022 edit undoWiki13565 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users23,849 edits {{R to section}} {{R hatnote}} | ||
| (877 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{pp-move-indef}} | |||
| {{TOCright}} | |||
| {{For|other uses|Myth (disambiguation)|Mythology (disambiguation)|Mythos (disambiguation)}} | |||
| {{redirect|Mythos|the ] character|Methos}} | |||
| {{Redirect category shell| | |||
| The term '''mythology''' can refer either to a collection of myths (a '''mythos''', e.g., ]) or to the study of myths (e.g., ]).<ref name="Kirk-p8">Kirk, p. 8; "myth", ''Encyclopædia Britannica''</ref> In ], a '''myth''' is a ] ] usually explaining how the world or humanity came to be in its present form,<ref name = "dundesintro">Dundes, Introduction, p. 1</ref> although, in a very broad sense, the word can refer to any ].<ref name="Kirk-p57,74">Kirk, "Defining", p. 57; Kirk, ''Myth'', p. 74; Simpson, p. 3</ref> ] defines myth as "ideology in narrative form".<ref>{{cite journal |last= Lincoln |first= Bruce |year= 2006 |title= An Early Moment in the Discourse of "Terrorism": Reflections on a Tale from Marco Polo |url= http://www.jstor.org/stable/3879351 |journal= ] |volume= 48 |issue= 2 |pages= 242–259 |quote= More precisely, mythic discourse deals in master categories that have multiple referents: levels of the cosmos, terrestrial geographies, plant and animal species, logical categories, and the like. Their plots serve to organize the relations among these categories and to justify a hierarchy among them, establishing the rightness (or at least the necessity) of a world in which heaven is above earth, the lion the king of beasts, the cooked more pleasing than the raw. }}</ref> Myths may arise as either ] or ] of historical events, as ] for or ] of natural phenomena, or as an ]. They are transmitted to convey ] or idealized experience, to establish behavioral models, and to ]. | |||
| {{R with history}} | |||
| {{R to section}} | |||
| Early rival classifications of ] by ], ]'s '']'', and ] were developed by the ] and revived by ] ] as in the '']'' (1532). Nineteenth-century ] reinterpreted myth as evolution toward ] (]), "disease of language" (]), or misinterpretation of ] ] (]). Later interpretations rejected opposition between myth and science, such as ]ian archetypes, ]'s "metaphor of spiritual potentiality", or ]'s fixed mental architecture. Tension between Campbell's comparative search for ] or Ur-myth and anthropological mythologists' skepticism of universal origin has marked the 20th century. Further, modern ] such as ], ], and ], with many competing ] acknowledged as fiction, supports the idea of myth as ongoing social practice. | |||
| {{R hatnote}} | |||
| }} | |||
| ==Nature of myths== | |||
| ===Characteristics=== | |||
| The main characters in myths are usually ], ] heroes and humans.<ref name = "mythnature">Bascom, p. 9</ref><ref name = "mythfolk">"myths", ''A Dictionary of English Folklore''</ref><ref>O'Flaherty, p.78: "I think it can be well argued as a matter of principle that, just as 'biography is about chaps', so mythology is about gods."</ref> As sacred stories, myths are often endorsed by rulers and priests and closely linked to religion or spirituality.<ref name = "mythnature"/> In the society in which it is told, a myth is usually regarded as a true account of the remote past.<ref name = "mythnature"/><ref name = "mythfolk"/><ref name = "eliademyth">Eliade, ''Myths, Dreams and Mysteries'', p. 23</ref><ref>Pettazzoni, p. 102</ref> In fact, many societies have two categories of traditional narrative, "true stories" or myths, and "false stories" or fables.<ref>Eliade, ''Myth and Reality'', pp. 10–11; Pettazzoni, pp. 99–101</ref> ]s generally take place in a primordial age, when the world had not yet achieved its current form,<ref name = "mythnature"/> and explain how the world gained its current form<ref name="dundesintro"/><ref name = "originmyth">Eliade, ''Myth and Reality'', p. 6</ref> and how ], ]s and ]s were established.<ref name = "mythnature"/><ref name = "originmyth"/> | |||
| ===Terminology=== | |||
| {{Mythology}} | |||
| {{See also|Legend|Folklore}} | |||
| The term "mythology" can refer either to the ''study'' of myths or to a ''body or collection'' of myths.<ref name="Kirk-p8" /> For example, ] is the study of landscape features in terms of totemistic mythology, whereas ] is the body of myths of the ]. In ], a "myth" is a ] ], "a story that serves to define the fundamental worldview of a culture by explaining aspects of the natural world and delineating the psychological and social practices and ideals of a society".<ref name=grassie/> Many scholars in other fields use the term "myth" in somewhat different ways;<ref name = "madness">Dundes, "Madness", p. 147</ref><ref>Doty, pp. 11–12</ref><ref>Segal, p. 5</ref> in a very broad sense, the word can refer to any ]<ref name="Kirk-p57,74" /> or, in casual use, a ] or ] entity.<ref>{{cite book|title=]'s Collegiate Dictionary|chapter=myth|page=770|edition=10th|publisher=], Inc|location=]|year=1993}}</ref> Because the folkloristic meaning of "myth" is often confused with this more pejorative usage, the original unambiguous term "mythos" may be a better word to distinguish the positive definition from the negative.<ref name=grassie>{{cite journal |last1=Grassie |first1=William |year=1998 |month=March |title=Science as Epic? Can the modern evolutionary cosmology be a mythic story for our time? |journal=Science & Spirit |volume=9 |issue=1 |quote=The word 'myth' is popularly understood to mean idle fancy, fiction, or falsehood; but there is another meaning of the word in academic discourse .... Using the original Greek term ''mythos'' is perhaps a better way to distinguish this more positive and all-encompassing definition of the word.}}</ref> | |||
| Closely related to myth are ] and ]. Myths, legends, and folktales are different types of traditional story.<ref>Bascom, p. 7</ref> Unlike mythos, folktales can be set in any time and any place, and they are not considered true or sacred by the societies that tell them.<ref name = "mythnature"/> Like mythos, legends are stories that are traditionally considered true, but are set in a more recent time, when the world was much as it is today.<ref name = "mythnature"/> Legends generally feature humans as their main characters, whereas myths generally focus on superhuman characters.<ref name = "mythnature"/> | |||
| The distinction between myth, legend, and folktale is meant simply as a useful tool for grouping traditional stories.<ref name = "mythlegendfolk">Bascom, p. 10</ref> In many cultures, it is hard to draw a sharp line between myths and legends.<ref>Kirk, ''Myth'', pp. 22, 32; Kirk, "Defining", p. 55</ref> Instead of dividing their traditional stories into myths, legends, and folktales, some cultures divide them into two categories, one that roughly corresponds to folktales, and one that combines myths and legends.<ref>Bascom, p. 17</ref> Even myths and folktales are not completely distinct. A story may be considered true (and therefore a mythos) in one society, but considered fictional (and therefore a folktale) in another society.<ref>Bascom, p. 13</ref><ref name = "doty">Doty, p. 114</ref> In fact, when a myth loses its status as part of a religious system, it often takes on traits more typical of folktales, with its formerly divine characters reinterpreted as human heroes, giants, or fairies.<ref name = "mythfolk"/> | |||
| Myth, legend, and folktale are only a few of the categories of ]. Other categories include ] and some kinds of ].<ref name = "mythlegendfolk"/> Traditional stories, in turn, are only one category within folklore, which also includes items such as gestures, costumes, and music.<ref name = "doty"/> | |||
| ==Origins of myth== | |||
| ===Euhemerism=== | |||
| {{Main|Euhemerism}} | |||
| {{See also|Herodotus}} | |||
| One theory claims that myths are distorted accounts of real historical events.<ref name = "bulfincheuhemerism">Bulfinch, p. 194</ref><ref name = "honkoancienttheories">Honko, p. 45</ref> According to this theory, storytellers repeatedly elaborated upon historical accounts until the figures in those accounts gained the status of gods.<ref name = "bulfincheuhemerism"/><ref name = "honkoancienttheories"/> For example, one might argue that the myth of the wind-god ] evolved from a historical account of a king who taught his people to use sails and interpret the winds.<ref name = "bulfincheuhemerism"/> ] (5th century BC) and ] made claims of this kind.<ref name = "honkoancienttheories"/> This theory is named "euhemerism" after the mythologist ] (c.320 BC), who suggested that the Greek gods developed from legends about human beings.<ref name = "honkoancienttheories"/><ref>"Euhemerism", ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions''</ref> | |||
| ===Allegory=== | |||
| Some theories propose that myths began as ]. According to one theory, myths began as allegories for natural phenomena: ] represents the sun, ] represents water, and so on.<ref name = "honkoancienttheories"/> According to another theory, myths began as allegories for philosophical or spiritual concepts: ] represents wise judgment, ] represents desire, etc.<ref name = "honkoancienttheories"/> The 19th century ] ] supported an allegorical theory of myth. He believed that myths began as allegorical descriptions of nature, but gradually came to be interpreted literally: for example, a poetic description of the sea as "raging" was eventually taken literally, and the sea was then thought of as a raging god.<ref>Segal, p. 20</ref> | |||
| ===Personification=== | |||
| {{See also|Mythopoeic thought}} | |||
| Some thinkers believe that myths resulted from the personification of inanimate objects and forces. According to these thinkers, the ancients worshipped natural phenomena such as fire and air, gradually coming to describe them as gods.<ref>Bulfinch, p. 195</ref> For example, according to the theory of ], the ancients tended to view things as persons, not as mere objects;<ref>Frankfort, p. 4</ref> thus, they described natural events as acts of personal gods, thus giving rise to myths.<ref>Frankfort, p. 15</ref> | |||
| ===Myth-ritual theory=== | |||
| {{See also|Myth and ritual}} | |||
| According to the myth-ritual theory, the existence of myth is tied to ritual.<ref>Segal, p. 61</ref> In its most extreme form, this theory claims that myths arose to explain rituals.<ref>Graf, p. 40</ref> This claim was first put forward by the biblical scholar ].<ref>Meletinsky pp. 19–20</ref> According to Smith, people begin performing rituals for some reason that is not related to myth; later, after they have forgotten the original reason for a ritual, they try to account for the ritual by inventing a myth and claiming that the ritual commemorates the events described in that myth.<ref>Segal, p. 63</ref> The anthropologist ] had a similar theory. Frazer believed that primitive man starts out with a belief in magical laws; later, when man begins to lose faith in magic, he invents myths about gods and claims that his formerly magical rituals are religious rituals intended to appease the gods.<ref name="Frazer, p. 711">Frazer, p. 711</ref> | |||
| ==Functions of myth== | |||
| ] argued that one of the foremost functions of myth is to establish models for behavior<ref>Eliade, ''Myth and Reality'', p. 8</ref><ref name = "honkomythfunction">Honko, p. 51</ref> and that myths may also provide a religious experience. By telling or reenacting myths, members of traditional societies detach themselves from the present and return to the mythical age, thereby bringing themselves closer to the divine.<ref name = "eliademyth"/><ref name = "honkomythfunction"/><ref>Eliade, ''Myth and Reality'', p. 19</ref> | |||
| ] asserts that, in some cases, a society will reenact a myth in an attempt to reproduce the conditions of the mythical age. For example, it will reenact the healing performed by a god at the beginning of time in order to heal someone in the present.<ref>Honko, p. 49</ref> Similarly, ] argues that modern culture explores religious experience. Because it is not the job of science to define human morality, a religious experience is an attempt to connect with a perceived moral past, which is in contrast with the technological present.<ref>Roland Barthes, Mythologies</ref> | |||
| ] writes: "In the long view of the history of mankind, four essential functions of mythology can be discerned. The first and most distinctive – vitalizing all – is that of eliciting and supporting a sense of awe before the mystery of being." <ref>{{cite book|last=Campbell|first=Joseph|title=Occidental Mythology|year=1991|publisher=Arkana|isbn=0-14-019441-X|page=519}}</ref> | |||
| "The second function of mythology is to render a cosmology, an image of the universe that will support and be supported by this sense of awe before the mystery of the presence and the presence of a mystery." <ref>Campbell, ''Occidental Mythology p519''</ref> | |||
| "A third function of mythology is to support the current social order, to integrate the individual organically with his group;"<ref>Campbell, ''Occidental Mythology p520''</ref> | |||
| "The fourth function of mythology is to initiate the individual into the order of realities of his own psyche, guiding him toward his own spiritual enrichment and realization."<ref>Campbell, ''Occidental Mythology p521'' </ref> | |||
| In a later work Campbell explains the relationship of myth to civilisation: | |||
| :"The rise and fall of civilisations in the long, broad course of history can be seen largely to be a function of the integrity and cogency of their supporting canons of myth; for not authority but aspiration is the motivator, builder, and transformer of civilisation. A mythological canon is an organisation of symbols, ineffable in import, by which the energies of aspiration are evoked and gathered toward a focus".<ref>Joseph Campbell, ''Creative Mythology p5''</ref> | |||
| And yet the history of civilisation is not one of harmony. | |||
| :"There are two pathologies. One is interpreting myth as pseudo-science, as though it had to do with directing nature instead of putting you in accord with nature, and the other is the political interpretation of myths to the advantage of one group within a society, or one society within a group of nations."<ref>{{cite book|last=Boa|first=Fraser|title=The way of myth : talking with Joseph Campbell|year=1994|publisher=Shambhala|location=Boston|isbn=1-57062-042-3|page=152|edition=1st Shambhala ed.}}</ref> | |||
| Campbell gives his answer to the question: ''what is the function of myth today''? in episode 2 of ]'s '']'' series. | |||
| ==Study of mythology== | |||
| {{see also|Comparative mythology}} | |||
| Historically, the important approaches to the study of mythology have been those of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], and the ].<ref>Guy Lanoue, Foreword to Meletinsky, p.viii</ref> | |||
| ===Pre-modern theories=== | |||
| The critical interpretation of myth goes back as far as the ].<ref name="Segal, p. 1">Segal, p. 1</ref> ] was one of the most important pre-modern mythologists. He interpreted myths as accounts of actual historical events, distorted over many retellings. This view of myths and their origin is criticised by Plato in the '']'' (229d), in which Socrates says that this approach is the province of one who is "vehemently curious and laborious, and not entirely happy . . ." The Platonists generally had a more profound and comprehensive view of the subject. ],<ref>On the Gods and the World, ch. 5, See Collected Writings on the Gods and the World, The Prometheus Trust, Frome, 1995</ref> for example, divides myths into five categories – theological, physical (or concerning natural laws), animastic (or concerning soul), material and mixed. This last being those myths which show the interaction between two or more of the previous categories and which, he says, are particularly used in initiations. | |||
| Although Plato famously condemned poetic myth when discussing the education of the young in the '']'', primarily on the grounds that there was a danger that the young and uneducated might take the stories of Gods and heroes literally, nevertheless he constantly refers to myths of all kinds throughout his writings. As Platonism developed in the phases commonly called 'middle Platonism' and ], such writers as ], ], ], ] and ] wrote explicitly about the symbolic interpretation of traditional and Orphic myths.<ref>Perhaps the most extended passage of philosophic interpretation of myth is to be found in the fifth and sixth essays of Proclus’ ''Commentary on the Republic'' (to be found in ''The Works of Plato I'', trans. Thomas Taylor, The Prometheus Trust, Frome, 1996); Porphyry’s analysis of the Homeric Cave of the Nymphs is another important work in this area (''Select Works of Porphyry'', Thomas Taylor The Prometheus Trust, Frome, 1994). See the external links below for a full English translation.</ref> | |||
| Interest in polytheistic mythology revived in the ], with early works on mythography appearing in the 16th century, such as the '']'' (1532). | |||
| ===19th-century theories=== | |||
| The first scholarly theories of myth appeared during the second half of the 19th century.<ref name="Segal, p. 1"/> In general, these 19th-century theories framed myth as a failed or obsolete mode of thought, often by interpreting myth as the primitive counterpart of modern science.<ref>Segal, pp. 3–4</ref> | |||
| For example, ] 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 ].<ref>Segal, p. 4</ref> According to Tylor, human thought evolves through various stages, starting with mythological ideas and gradually progressing to scientific ideas. Not all scholars — not even all 19th century scholars — have agreed with this view. For example, ] claimed that "the primitive mentality is a condition of the human mind, and not a stage in its historical development."<ref>{{cite book|last=Mâche|title=Music, Myth and Nature, or The Dolphins of Arion| year=1992| pages= 8}}</ref> | |||
| ] 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.<ref>Segal, p.20</ref> | |||
| The anthropologist ] saw myths as a misinterpretation of magical rituals; which were themselves based on a mistaken idea of natural law.<ref>Segal, pp. 67–68</ref> 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 to science".<ref name="Frazer, p. 711"/> | |||
| Robert Segal asserts that by pitting mythical thought against modern scientific thought, such theories implied that modern man must abandon myth.<ref name="Segal, p. 3">Segal, p. 3</ref> | |||
| ===20th-century theories=== | |||
| Many 20th-century theories of myth rejected the 19th-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."<ref name="Segal, p. 3"/> | |||
| Swiss psychologist ] (1873–1961) tried to understand the psychology behind world myths. Jung asserted that all humans share certain innate unconscious psychological forces, which he called ]. Jung believed that the similarities between the myths from different cultures reveals the existence of these universal archetypes.<ref>Boeree</ref> | |||
| ] believed that there were two different orders of mythology: myths that "are metaphorical of spiritual potentiality in the human being," and myths "that have to do with specific societies".<ref>Campbell, p. 22</ref> | |||
| ]'s major work is ''The Masks of God I-IV''. In the first volume, ''Primitive Mythology'', he outlines clearly his intention: | |||
| :"Without straining beyond the treasuries of evidence already on hand in these widely scattered departments of our subject, therefore, but simply gathering from them the membra disjuncta of a unitary mythological science, I attempt in the following pages the first sketch of a natural history of the gods and heroes, such as in its final form should include in its purview all divine beings—as zoology includes all animals and botany all plants—not regarding any as sacrosanct or beyond its scientific domain. For, as in the visible world of the vegetable and animal kingdoms, so also in the visionary world of the gods: there has been a history, an evolution, a series of mutations, governed by laws; and to show forth such laws is the proper aim of science."<ref>{{cite book|last=Campbell|first=Joseph|title=Primitive Mythology|year=1991|publisher=Arkana|isbn=0-14-019443-6|page=4}}</ref> | |||
| In his fourth volume however he coins the phrase, '']'', which he explains as: | |||
| :"In the context of traditional mythology, the symbols are presented in socially maintained rites, through which the individual is required to experience, or will pretend to have experienced, certain insights, sentiments and commitments. In what I'm calling creative mythology, on the other hand, this order is reversed: the individual has had an experience of his own – of order, horror, beauty, or even mere exhiliration-which he seeks to communicate through signs; and if his realization has been of a certain depth and import, his communication will have the force and value of living myth-for those, that is to say, who receive and respond to it of themselves, with recognition, uncoerced."<ref>{{cite book|last=Campbell|first=Joseph|title=Creative Mythology|year=1991|publisher=Arkana|isbn=0-14-019440-1|page=4}}</ref> | |||
| ] believed that myths reflect patterns in the mind and interpreted those patterns more as fixed mental structures — specifically, pairs of opposites (i.e. good/evil, compassionate/callous) — than as unconscious feelings or urges.<ref>Segal, p. 113</ref> | |||
| In his appendix to ''Myths, Dreams and Mysteries'', and in ''The Myth of the Eternal Return'', ] attributed modern man’s anxieties to his rejection of myths and the sense of the ]. | |||
| In the 1950s, ] published a series of essays examining modern myths and the process of their creation in his book '']''. | |||
| ]'' (1868) by ]. In the ] mythos of ] and possibly ] (the ] trilogy '']'', '']'' and '']''), Prometheus is bound and tortured for giving fire to humanity at its creation.]] | |||
| ==Comparative mythology== | |||
| {{Main|Comparative mythology}} | |||
| Comparative mythology is the systematic comparison of myths from different cultures.<ref name="Littleton, p. 32">Littleton, p. 32</ref> It seeks to discover underlying themes that are common to the myths of multiple cultures.<ref name="Littleton, p. 32"/> In some cases, comparative mythologists use the similarities between different mythologies to argue that those mythologies have a common source. This common source may be a common source of inspiration (e.g. a certain natural phenomenon that inspired similar myths in different cultures) or a common "protomythology" that diverged into the various mythologies we see today.<ref name="Littleton, p. 32"/> | |||
| Nineteenth-century interpretations of myth were often highly comparative, seeking a common origin for all myths.<ref>Leonard</ref> However, modern-day scholars tend to be more suspicious of comparative approaches, avoiding overly general or universal statements about mythology.<ref name="Northup, p. 8">Northup, p. 8</ref> One exception to this modern trend is ]'s book '']'' (1949), which claims that all ] myths follow the same underlying pattern. This theory of a "]" is out of favor with the mainstream study of mythology.<ref name="Northup, p. 8"/> | |||
| ==Modern mythology== | |||
| ] ], depicting ], ] and ].]] | |||
| In modern society, myth is often regarded as historical or obsolete. Many scholars in the field of ] are now beginning to research the idea that myth has worked itself into modern discourses. Modern formats of communication allow for wide spread communication across the globe, thus enabling mythological discourse and exchange among greater audiences than ever before. Various elements of myth can now be found in ], ] and ]. | |||
| Although myth was traditionally transmitted through the oral tradition on a small scale, the technology of the film industry has enabled filmmakers to transmit myths to large audiences via film dissemination (Singer, “Mythmaking: Philosophy in Film”, 3–6). In the psychology of ], myths are the expression of a culture or society’s goals, fears, ambitions and dreams (Indick, “Classical Heroes in Modern Movies: Mythological Patterns of the Superhero", 93–95). Film is ultimately an expression of the society in which it was credited, and reflects the norms and ideals of the time and location in which it is created. In this sense, film is simply the evolution of myth. The technological aspect of film changes the way the myth is distributed, but the core idea of the myth is the same. | |||
| The basis of modern storytelling in both cinema and television lies deeply rooted in the mythological tradition. Many contemporary and technologically advanced movies often rely on ancient myths to construct narratives. The ] is notorious among cultural study scholars for “reinventing” traditional childhood myths (Koven, “Folklore Studies and Popular Film and Television: A Necessary Critical Survey”, 176–195). While many films are not as obvious as Disney fairy tales in respect to the employment of myth, the plots of many films are largely based on the rough structure of the myth. Mythological archetypes such as the cautionary tale regarding the abuse of technology, battles between gods, and creation stories are often the subject of major film productions. These films are often created under the guise of cyberpunk ], ] dramas, and ] tales. Although the range of narratives, as well as the medium in which it is being told is constantly increasing, it is clear that myth continues to be a pervasive and essential component of the collective imagination (Cormer, "Narrative." Critical Ideas in Television Studies, 47–59.) | |||
| Recent films such as '']'', '']'' or '']'' continue the trend of mining traditional mythology in order to directly create a plot for modern consumption. Although these are generally considered inaccurate to the original mythologies on which they are based, it can be argued that as film itself has become a way of transmitting myths, these films are no more inaccurate than the variants told by storytellers of the oral tradition. In fact, it is argued that these new contributions to traditional myths add value and meaning to the stories for new generations (Matira, "Children's Oral Literature and Modern Mass Media", 55–57). | |||
| With the invention of modern myths such as ], the mythological traditional will carry on to the increasing variety of mediums available to the consumer in the 21st century and beyond. The crucial idea is that myth is not simply a collection of stories permanently fixed to a particular time and place in history, but an ongoing social practice within every society. | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| ;General: | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| {{Portal|Mythology}} | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| ;Mythological archetypes | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| ;Myth and religion | |||
| ] and ] represented as half-snake, half-human creatures]] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| ;Lists | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| ==Notes== | |||
| {{Reflist|2}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| *Armstrong, Karen. "A Short History of Myth". Knopf Canada, 2006. | |||
| *]. "The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives". '''Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth''. Ed. Alan Dundes. Berkeley: ], 1984. 5–29. | |||
| *]. '']''. Whitefish: Kessinger, 2004. | |||
| *]. "The Power of Myth". New York: Doubleday, 1988. | |||
| *Doty, William. ''Myth: A Handbook''. Westport: Greenwood, 2004. | |||
| *]. "Binary Opposition in Myth: The Propp/Levi-Strauss Debate in Retrospect". ''Western Folklore'' 56 (Winter, 1997): 39–50. | |||
| *Dundes, Alan. Introduction. ''Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth''. Ed. Alan Dundes. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. 1–3. | |||
| *Dunes, Alan. "Madness in Method Plus a Plea for Projective Inversion in Myth". ''Myth and Method''. Ed. Laurie Patton and Wendy Doniger. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1996. | |||
| *]. ''Myth and Reality''. Trans. Willard R. Trask. New York: Harper & Row, 1963. | |||
| *Eliade, Mircea. ''Myths, Dreams and Mysteries''. Trans. Philip Mairet. New York: Harper & Row, 1967. | |||
| *"Euhemerism". ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions''. Ed. John Bowker. Oxford University Press, 2000. ]. UC – Berkeley Library. 20 March 2009 . | |||
| * ] | |||
| *], et al. ''The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man: An Essay on Speculative Thought in the Ancient Near East''. Chicago:], 1977. | |||
| *]. '']''. New York: Macmillan, 1922. | |||
| *Graf, Fritz. ''Greek Mythology''. Trans. Thomas Marier. Baltimore: ], 1993. | |||
| *Honko, Lauri. "The Problem of Defining Myth". ''Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth''. Ed. Alan Dundes. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. 41–52. | |||
| *Kirk, G.S. ''Myth: Its Meaning and Functions in Ancient and Other Cultures''. Berkeley: Cambridge University Press, 1973. | |||
| *Kirk, G.S. "On Defining Myths". ''Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth''. Ed. Alan Dundes. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. 53–61. | |||
| *Leonard, Scott. "The History of Mythology: Part I". ''Scott A. Leonard's Home Page''. August 2007., 17 November 2009 | |||
| *Littleton, Covington. ''The New Comparative Mythology: An Anthropological Assessment of the Theories of Georges Dumezil''. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973. | |||
| *Meletinsky, Elea. ''The Poetics of Myth''. Trans. Guy Lanoue and Alexandre Sadetsky. New York: Routledge, 2000. | |||
| *"myth." ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. 2009. , 21 March 2009 | |||
| *"myths". ''A Dictionary of English Folklore''. Jacqueline Simpson and Steve Roud. Oxford University Press, 2000. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. UC – Berkeley Library. 20 March 2009 | |||
| *Northup, Lesley. "Myth-Placed Priorities: Religion and the Study of Myth". ''Religious Studies Review'' 32.1(2006): 5–10. | |||
| *O'Flaherty, Wendy. ''Hindu Myths: A Sourcebook''. London: Penguin, 1975. | |||
| *Pettazzoni, Raffaele. "The Truth of Myth". ''Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth''. Ed. Alan Dundes. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. 98–109. | |||
| *Segal, Robert. ''Myth: A Very Short Introduction''. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004. | |||
| *Simpson, Michael. Introduction. Apollodorus. ''Gods and Heroes of the Greeks''. Trans. Michael Simpson. Amherst: ], 1976. 1–9. | |||
| *Singer, Irving. "Introduction: Philosophical Dimensions of Myth and Cinema." Cinematic Mythmaking: Philosophy in Film. Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States: MIT Press Books, 2008. 3–6. Web. 23 Oct. 2011. | |||
| *Indick, William. "Classical Heroes in Modern Movies: Mythological Patterns of the Superhero." Journal of Media Psychology 9.3 (2004): 93–95. York University Libraries. Web. | |||
| *Koven, Mikel J. "Folklore Studies and Popular Film and Television: a Necessary Critical Survey." Journal of American Folklore 116.460 (2003): 176–195. Print. | |||
| *{{cite web |last=Olson |first=Eric L. |title=Great Expectations: the Role of Myth in 1980s Films with Child Heroes |work= Virginia Polytechnic Scholarly Library |publisher=Virginia Polytechnic Institute And State University |date=May 3, 2011 |accessdate=October 24, 2011 |url=http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05172011-113805/unrestricted/OLSON_EL_T_2011.pdf|format=PDF }} | |||
| *Matira, Lopamundra. "Children's Oral Literature and Modern Mass Media." Indian Folklore Research Journal 5.8 (2008): 55–57. Print. | |||
| *Cormer, John. "Narrative." Critical Ideas in Television Studies. New York, United States: Charendon Press, 2007. 47–59. Print. | |||
| ==Further reading== | |||
| * Stefan Arvidsson, ''Aryan Idols. Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science'', University of Chicago Press, 2006. ISBN 0-226-02860-7 | |||
| *], ''Mythologies'' (1957) | |||
| *Kees W. Bolle, ''The Freedom of Man in Myth''. ], 1968. | |||
| *Richard Buxton. ''The Complete World of Greek Mythology''. London: Thames & Hudson, 2004. | |||
| *E. Csapo, ''Theories of Mythology'' (2005) | |||
| *], '']'' (1998) | |||
| *Graves, Robert. "Introduction." ''New Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology''. Trans. Richard Aldington and Delano Ames. London: Hamlyn, 1968. v–viii. | |||
| *] | |||
| **'']''. ], 1949. | |||
| **''Flight of the Wild Gander: Explorations in the Mythological Dimension: Select Essays 1944–1968'' New World Library, 3rd ed. (2002), ISBN 978-1-57731-210-9. | |||
| **'']''. Doubleday, 1988, ISBN 0-385-24773-7. | |||
| **'']''. New World Library, 2001, ISBN 1-57731-202-3 | |||
| *] | |||
| **''Cosmos and History: The Myth of the Eternal Return''. ], 1954. | |||
| **''The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion''. Trans. Willard R. Trask. NY: Harper & Row, 1961. | |||
| *Louis Herbert Gray , ''The Mythology of All Races'', in 12 vols., 1916. | |||
| *] | |||
| **''Mental Functions in Primitive Societies'' (1910) | |||
| **''Primitive Mentality'' (1922) | |||
| **''The Soul of the Primitive'' (1928) | |||
| **''The Supernatural and the Nature of the Primitive Mind'' (1931) | |||
| **''Primitive Mythology'' (1935) | |||
| **''The Mystic Experience and Primitive Symbolism'' (1938) | |||
| *Charles H. Long, ''Alpha: The Myths of Creation''. George Braziller, 1963. | |||
| *O'Flaherty, Wendy. ''Hindu Myths: A Sourcebook''. London: Penguin, 1975. | |||
| *Barry B. Powell, ''Classical Myth'', 5th edition, Prentice-Hall. | |||
| *Santillana and Von Dechend (1969, 1992 re-issue). ''Hamlet's Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge And Its Transmission Through Myth'', ]. ISBN 0-87923-215-3. | |||
| <!--not useful to the modern reader*] | |||
| **''Introduction to the Philosophy of Mythology'', 1856. | |||
| **''Philosophy of Mythology'', 1857. | |||
| **''Philosophy of Revelation'', 1858.--> | |||
| *Isabelle Loring Wallace and Jennie Hirsh, ''Contemporary Art and Classical Myth''. Farnham: Ashgate (2011), ISBN 978-0-7546-6974-6 | |||
| *Walker, Steven F. and Segal, Robert A., ''Jung and the Jungians on Myth: An Introduction'', Theorists of Myth, Routledge (1996), ISBN 978-0-8153-2259-7. | |||
| *Vanda Zajko and Miriam Leonard, ''Lauphing with Medusa''. Oxford: Oxford `University Press (2006), ISBN 978-0-19-923794-4. | |||
| *Zong, In-Sob. ''Folk Tales from Korea''. 3rd ed. Elizabeth: Hollym, 1989. | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| {{Wiktionary|myth|mythology}} | |||
| {{Wikiversity|School:Comparative Mythology}} | |||
| {{Commons category}} | |||
| *], ed. Beach (1914), at ]. | |||
| *. ]. | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * Old Tales and Superstitions Interpreted by comparative mythology by John Fiske. | |||
| * ], a database of ancient objects linked with mythology | |||
| * | |||
| {{Philosophy topics}} | |||
| {{Philosophy of religion}} | |||
| {{Theology}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| {{Link FA|no}} | |||
| {{Link GA|ja}} | |||
Latest revision as of 14:01, 14 December 2022
Redirect to:
| This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|