Aspies For Freedom

Like Arthur and Merlin? Or the older stuff. I confess to not knowing much about Celtic Mythology :oops:  But always like to read about it. I read Mallory's "La mort d'Arthur" for a university course. (Apologies if I made mistakes in title. French is not my language.) There is a lot of smiting. But Arthurian tales are very interesting.

I heard somewhere that JRR Tolkein thought that England had no mythology, and that Arthur didn't belong in British myth because a lot of the sources were French. For my part, I don't agree with this because it's like saying that there is no real Greek myth just because the Romans wrote about it.

But from what I've read and heard about Tolkein, he thought of "English" as being an essentially Saxon culture. And Arthur fought against the Saxons. So of course from that perspective English people wouldn't identify with him.

But they do.

Another question. Who is your favourite character? (Or characters?) Mine is Cassandra, Princess of Troy. And also Artemis. And my fav. Celtic / Arthurian character is Merlin. And my favourite Japanese character is Kagoyahime. (The Princess of the Moon)

Dogface, you make a good argument. I stand corrected. It was not the best choice of words. I remember having this debate once in class, and it turned out quite interesting. Everyone who is interested in such topics always seems to have a view. I think the transference of gods from Greek to Roman comes primarily from the assigning of the names of various "numini" (Roman animistic deities) to their Greek counterparts, in much the same way as the Greeks believed that the Egyptian god Amon Ra was a "version" of Zeus.

Although, having said that, those few myths belonging specifically to Rome (ie -- those actually set in Rome) do tend to be suspiciously linear. But perhaps that has more to do with the limited number of city-states (like the Greek poleis) in Italy at the time.

I generally consider greek mythological names to be the origionals.
anybody like norse or egyptian?

Sorry if it's a bit long...

Of course, anyone could make the argument that the transference of mythical tradition extends through all the Indo-European culture and beyond. The most common themes, utilised in their way by academics such as Joseph Campbell and by modern epics like LOTR and Star Wars, are found in almost every place. (And thus the notion that every story is a variation on approx. 75 possible plot lines.)

Do you suppose, though, that the principal story of the Italian's descent and origins -- that many of them came from Trojan refugees who were led by Aeneas -- if in some measure true, could partially explain the influence of Achaean / Hellenic tradition upon their culture? (I am not stating an opinion here, merely posing the question, perhaps.)

I don't believe that Tolkein "missed" the Celtic traditions either, but have heard arguments (For instance, some on LOTR dvds) that he was attempting to replace or create a mythological tradition where there was previously none of significance. (And then the same people then turn to Beowulf as one of Tolkein's major sources. Which seems like a wee discrepancy to me if they're trying to argue a lack of Anglo-Saxon tradition.

The Arthurian sources, from what I can discover, were originally British. (I will say British here, not English, because English culture is primarily, although not entirely, Saxon.) But much of the major stories (eg. Lancelot, Mordred as Arthur's son -- not nephew) were introduced or adapted by French authors. Thus the medieval ideal -- it is believed by some -- is French, not English / British.

I also heard another theory, which was that Arthur possibly started off as an early Celtic deity, which is one reason why no-one took his name for such a long time afterwards. Don't know what I think about this one. Possibly there could have been a deity once, and the traditions were merged to include a historical figure.

"Doubtful.  From what I've read, it all works the other way around.  In an effort to tie themselves more closely with an ancient glory and rationalize enmity with the Greeks, Romans siezed upon a minor Homeric character and back-claimed him as a Founder figure."

... And then invented the lineage to tie Aeneas to Romulus and Remus, and thus to certain major aristocratic families, including the Caesars. (Augustus used supposed descent from Aeneas -- Venus' son to lend "legitimacy" to his claim.) Although, all told, it is not uncommon to use imagined genealogy in this way.

:smile: I'm trying to learn about lots of other traditions (Egyptian, Sumerian, Celtic, Asian, Judeo-Christian etc) but the larger part of what I know, understand, read about, still comes from Classical Greece.

Something interesting I noticed...

I bought a book on World Mythology (Arthur Cotterell's Encyclopaedia of World Mythology) and it's generally very comprehensive. But I noticed there was nothing on Bible stories. Hmmmm.... Wonder why.

Question: What happened to the Dixie Chicks?

Actually, I would have to disagree with some of the above comments. If your implication is that including Judeo-Christian "scripture" would cheapen it somehow, I disagree. (If not, perhaps I misread your meaning and so apologise)

It just seemed to me to be a curious omission, especially as so much comes from earlier traditions elsewhere.

To Amadeus_lupin, I don't see that anyone here is bashing Tolkein. To add context, the notion that he excluded Celtic legend from his idea of British myth was one that I heard one academic putting forward on the Extended edition LOTR DVD. (Appendices Part 1) The idea being proposed was that he considered England to be devoid of mythic tradition. Personally, I consider said academic's words to have been an over-simplistic representation of his influences.

It is true what you said about Arthur. But much of his influence does also come from the French romances, from which we ourselves get the present day version of the tales. The claim that he is not English should perhaps be revised to a "non-Anglo-Saxon" representation. And the notion has been put forward that much of the reason that the medieval French seized upon the legend was that he fought against Saxons, representing the English, representing the French people's traditional enemy. (cf Sarah Douglass, among others whose names I don't remember.)

:oops: Oops. This went on longer than I planned.

Hmmm... Actually an interesting post-script is that I just found another mythology book which does include scripture. (Mostly Old Testament).

But it makes perfect sense to include, because many of the same themes are present, and several of the stories barely differ from their antecedents.

But... It's good that mythology books don't include Jesus, though, because he is a known historical figure.

  Long-time fanatic of Tolkien and Greek mythology here.  I got into Celtic mythology around age thirteen, when I converted to Paganism...I especially love the Arthurian legends, the Grail, the Cauldron.  I'm revisiting it all now, as part of my Grail-quest, as well as the history of the early Christian church and the mythology it evolved into.  

I didn't pay much attention to Roman mythology...I thought of it as a less interesting rip-off of the Greek stories as a child.

<hugs>

Athie

Joseph Campbell had a similar theory in his "Hero with a Thousand Faces", and there's also an interesting book where he was interviewed after watching back to back "Star Wars" movies. (Fascinating stuff)

Also, the Russian Formalists were quite interested in looking for commonalities in folktale, generally associated with structure and character roles.

There is also a weak division between what has been called "old myth" and "new myth". New myth is the legends that read like history. For example, the Trojan cycle, or tales of Arthur and the Saxons. Old myth is like, for instance, the stories associated with Heracles' twelve labours, which may have much older origins dating back to Neolithic or even Paleolithic shamanist traditions. Terribly oversimplified explanation on my part, I know, but as much as one paragraph could take.

P.S. Happy. I was kind of sad when this thread died 'cos I love talking about mythology so much (can you tell? -- :sarc: ) But it's back. Yay.

I love mythology, because I think it gives people something to think about while telling an entertaining story.

On the subject of different religions copying each other, I've read something that linked Jesus with Odin. They have lots of similarities, like the whole sacrificing yourself to yourself....thing...and Odin speared himself to an ash tree to get the runes, while Jesus was nailed up on a piece of wood too, and achieved great power after that as well.

Also, their symbols look the same.
http://www.geocities.com/fusaoracial/odin_rune_thin.gif
Odin

http://www.csne2.homestead.com/files/fish_jesus.gif
Jesus

They've also been used as justification for white supremacy.....which i really don't get....

As far as I know, Odin never told people that blacks and jews were inferior, and Jesus loved everybody....

Ironic, isn't it, that white supremacists should "use" a 1st century Jewish philosopher as a symbol? I think in both cases it was a matter of saying, "our traditions are better than others," by re-interpreting myth and symbol to fit one's own agenda. (As has been done throughout history.) It's the dark side of adaptability.

My recollection of Le Mort d'Arthur is that there was a lot of smiting.

Prufrock, does your mum use you as a walking crossword reference, too?

I like the story about where "panic" comes from. (A motif repeated in movies everywhere!)

  "Let Panic chase you through the maze, but Pan is only playing!"

My dad, when he was in his early twenties and very into magick, once heard the pipes of Pan.  He said it was terrifying, but I was very jealous.  Apparently some people find the sound soothing.

<hugs>

Athie