September 22nd 2007 09:28
In a simple foreword, Robert Graves explains the system behind the Greek Mythology and then begins to examine the whole gamut of it in his The Greek Myths. His main contentions are not really subject to proof but his collection is perhaps the most popular and certainly, the most accesible collection of the Greek mythology available today. As an amateur interested in ancient mythologies in general, I am stuck by how much there is in Greek mythology. The size of the cast, the depth of the stories, the density of inter-relationships are all so mind-bogglingly complex that it takes a patient, determined, scholar-like effort to get acquainted with it all. I am no scholar, just an amateur. Graves's collection, written in a non-fussy prose and cast in relatively simple schema is easy to read. In shot, made for people like me.
In ancient Europe, there were no gods. Only a Goddess. She was worshipped in various forms and shapes and the society she presided was a matriarchal one where fake kingships were established and disposed of yearly in picturesquely grotesque ways for the sake of good harvests. One day, a variety of God-worshipping warrior tribes conquered the matriarchal societies. They took over the original religion and the rites, they razed the temple. Goddesses were only spared if their followers agreed to make them subservient to their Father God.
Greek Mythology is nothing but a transcription of this ancient revolution, which was "not more mysterious in content than are modern election cartoons."
Of course, it is a little more complex than that with four stages of evolution, lunations and cyclic revolutions thrown in but you've got the idea.
Even an amateur can discern certain inconsistencies as Graves's plunking together of disparate mythic figures just to get his Triple Goddess triad right, like combining Semele with Athena. Experts have complained about the value of Graves's etymological and historical claims.
What do I think of it? There is probably some truth to it and I believe there could be some original exclusively Mother-Goddess cults which went a violent transformation under a patriarchal assault. I don't think it can be made to explain the entire spectrum of Greek mythology as Graves has attempted to do.
Still, it's quite an enjoyable read and it gives you information no other paperback does.
I was suffering from a huge writer's block last week and also a huge reader's block. Couldn't make myself read anything, much less write anything. Since, it's been almost a week since I wrote anything, I made myself get up and searched the local library for something interesting. I stumbled on Joseph Nigg's Fablous Beasts: A Treasury of Writings From Ancients to the Present.
Nigg's book is not just any bestiary which catelogues mythical beasts and their fantastic features. Such bestiaries are a legion and are to be found even on internet. This book is a compendium of the ancient sources themselves. As it quotes the most relevant authors whose works have had a hand in the the life of the fantastic creatures, from Homer to Carl Jung, you can track the vicissitudes in the fortunes of these beasts and the men who believed or refuse to believe in them.
Mr.Nigg's book is divided into four sections: Ancient Creatures, Beasts of God, Strange and Dubious Creatures and Recurring Images.
In Ancient Creatures, Nigg provides the excerpts from classical authors from Greece and Rome who discussed these fantastic beasts. The Arabian Phoenix and the cinnamon bird, the Indian manticore, griffin and unicorn and other beasts from Ethiopia, Scythia and Egypt are the ones which seem to have fascinated the ancients the most. The ancients were also concerned about Armaspes, a race of one-eyed humans who were supposed to live in Scythia just below the Hyperboreans and somehow I feel that Rowling's nifflers are based on giant gold-digging ants described here.
These fabulous creatures lost their vitality once the classical world ended but were soon revived under the Church, where they now served the added purpose of edification of the doctrine. The second section probes the extensive use made by fabulous beasts by the Church. The phoenix, the unicorn and the griffin still hold the pride of the place.
The third section continues the voyage through the Renaissance times. Their use was disrupted in seventeenth century when people declared they were fictitious but they were back in vogue in nineteenth and twentieth centuries, not the least in speculative fiction.
Nigg introduces these excerpts with competent prefacing. By the end of the book, you are actually taken through thousands of years, man spent in search of the elusive animals which plagued his consciousness by straying onto the periphery but never to the front.
I knew most of these animals and stories told here but the book was still a great discovery for me. I had read Herodotus and Ctesias before but it was great reading obscure authors like Aelian and Solinus.
All in all a great anthology. A book that will rouse you out of any slumbe by invokinng your sense of wonder and merriment.
Bernard Lewis is one of the most respected scholars on Islam and The Crisis in Islam began as a long essay on Islam in 2001, that critical year which changed all our lives, and ended up being a short book in 2003. I have read Lewis' other histories which are written in somewhat cagey style. This books by contrast is an exercise in simplicty. Lewis writes simply but by the end is able to pack up so much punch, he is able to render the tragedy of modern Islam without apologising for it nor showing any virulence. It is thoughtful and shattering at the same time.
Lewis spends only little time with the early history of Islam and the Crusades and such like but picks up on the moribund state of Islam during the start of last century, a state which still plagues it. He shows how Islamic world was fundamentally oblivious to America till a few decades ago and then suddenly discovered it and quickly made it into the Islamic version of Babylon, an immoral place which has to be destroyed.
According to Lewis, " the most powerful accusation of all is the degeneracy and debauchery of the American way of life, and the threat that it offers to Islam.........That is what is meant by the term the Great satan, applied to the united States by the late Ayotollah Khomeeini. Satan as depicted in the Quran is neither an imperialist nor an exploiter. He is a seducer, ' an insidious tempter who whispers in the hearts of men.' "
The focus of the book is squarely on the the threat posed by Islam to the west and does not go beyond. It does not probably occur to Lewis that Islam might provide a threat to wider world than simply the West and his summation is generosity itself.
He clings to all the sunny possibilities that will prevent Islam from becoming a world wide threat but ends on this sombre note: " If the fundamentalists are corect in their calculations and succeed in their war, then a dark future awaits the world, especially the part of it that embraces Islam."
One can only wish desperately that the fundamentalists are wrong in their calculations.
The prominent feature of a hero across different mythologies are the mysterious circumstances surrounding his birth. They are born in difficult circumstances and are brought up in a different family than their own. At one point in his life, the hero becomes aware of his true parentage.
Otto Rank belonged to the innre circle of Freud's admirers and in this work, rank applies the psycho-analytic theory of Freud to these myths, making this one of the first attempts at psycho-analytic interpretation of mythologies. This became a cottage industry thereafter.
The heroes Rank examines are Sargon, Karna, Lohengrin, Moses, Perseus,Telephus, Romulus, Hercules, Gilgamesh, Paris, Jesus, Tristan, Siegfried, Cyrus and of course Oedipus.
Rank briefly describes the legends surrounding the heroes and then gives his interpretation of myths. The list is not particularly exhaustive and is notable for complete exclusion of any female heroes. Heroines like Atalanta, Semiramis and Shakunthala too have the similar themes surrounding their births. One flaw of psycho-analyis was the insignificance of female psychology and this study reveals the lacuna quite early on.
As I was reading about the Amazons, I stumbled on this piece by Florence Mary Bennett on the net. It's there on Bulfinch's mythology and on sacred texts as well. A scholary dissertation on the religious beliefs of Amazons, it searches for the extensive references of Amazons in classical literarture, wherever they are mentioned in regards to their religious beliefs.
The list is comprehensive as Bennett searches through the maze of classical references, she finds many instances to the religious practices of Amazons. theier main object of worship seems to be a baetylic or aniconic form of Mother Goddess, similar to the famous Phrygian Goddess Cybele whose baetyl was transferred to Rome to ward of Hannibal's attacks.
Amazons are said to have worshipped pre-eminently at the Artemesium of Ephesus, one of the seven wonders of classical antiquity. As Bennett searches the various Goddesses that Amazons said to have worshipped, she draws a common characteristic: they were all war-goddesses. Even Goddesses known for other attributes like Aphrodite seem to have war function.
Bennett then examines the male gods that Amazons were said to have worshipped and this is where she leads into hornet's nest. All the male gods seem to have an effeminate characteristic to them and this leads into the area of Corybantes, Curetes and Dactylii.
Bennett's thesis then is that Amazons were initially a cult of worshippers of a war-like Mother Goddess, just like the Corybantes and others, who probably cut off their breasts in the heat of worship. This gave them a fierce repuatation and whenever later classical writers met women warriors, they referredd to them as Amazons.
The treatise was written in 1913, so some of the intital discussion about the war-like goddess is somewaht dated but when Bennett steers into the cultic angle, the discussion gets complicated and fascinating. I thought her conclusion was a bit too pat but this is still remains a fascinating read.
Hew Strachan’s Financing the First World War looks at the war from a very unusual angle. When I picked up the book in the library, the librarian was impressed. She thought it was unusual too.
At the beginning of the World War I, London was the world’s financial capital. At its end, its position was taken by New York. The book describes in detail the vicissitudes in fortunes of the main players of the war.
It gives you a low-down of the stock market fluctuations, currency vagaries, loans and moratoria troubles and the gold standard problems that beset the war. It omits any details of small change like you know the number of deaths, the battles won and lost, the politics, the politicians, in short, it omits any of the conventional details of what you might call a war narrative and focuses on its financial underbelly. That gives you a tremendous insight into how wars are fought and lost and how important a good financial policy is to waging a war.
I am no economist and I must confess that I found a lot of the verbiage used in this book daunting. Nevertheless, I kept reading the book without giving up; it’s that good! Thought it’s clearly intended for the scholarly circuit, it is a small book and with a little effort, can be grasped easily by others as well.
Add Comments
Comments (1)
