Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T19:45:00.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

V. Mythology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2016

Get access

Extract

Myth played an important role in Greek religion: it illustrated and defined the roles of gods and heroes (Ch. II.1); it explained aspects of rituals (Ch. IV.3), showed correct or deviant patterns of behaviour, and reflected on human behaviour and the cosmos. Since, of all aspects of Greek religion, myth has probably drawn the greatest attention and the largest number of different approaches, we start with a short historical survey of these approaches and a discussion of recent definitions (§ 1). Then we analyse origins and uses of myth (§ 2) and study the relations between myth and ritual (§ 3). We conclude by looking at some changes in the popularity of myths, as reflected by the visual arts, and the nature of myth itself (§ 4).

Type
Research Article
Information
New Surveys in the Classics , Volume 24: Greek Religion with addenda , 1999 , pp. 55 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Cf. Scheer, T. S., Mythische Vorväter. Zur Bedeutung griechischer Heroenmythen im Selbstverständnis kleinasiatischer Städte (Munich, 1993), pp. 24-9Google Scholar.

2. It is therefore curious that there is no chapter on mythology in Nilsson, M. P., Geschichte der griechischen Religion 1 (Munich, 1967 3)Google Scholar, the previous standard handbook on Greek religion; Rudhardt, Notions fondamentales; Burkert, GR, and Jost, Aspects. Bruit/Schmitt, Religion, pp. 143–75 do discuss mythology but rather unsatisfactorily: they virtually neglect Burkert’s contributions but praise Georges Dumézil highly.

3. Good introductions, each with a different approach: Dowden, K., The Uses of Greek Mythology (London, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Graf, F., Greek Mythology (Baltimore and London, 1993)Google Scholar; Said, S., Approches de la mythologie grecque (Paris, 1993)Google Scholar; Buxton, Imaginary Greece. See also Calarne, C. (ed), Métamorphoses du mythe en Grèce antique (Geneva, 1988)Google Scholar; Bremmer, Interpretations of Greek Mythology; Edmunds, L. (ed), Approaches to Greek Myth (Baltimore and London, 1990)Google Scholar.

4. The best historical survey now is Graf, Greek Mythology, pp. 9–56.

5. Comes, Natales, Mythologiae (sive explicationum fabularum libri X) (Venice, 1551; 15672, repr. New York, 1976)Google Scholar, cf. Montiel, R. M. Iglesias and Moran, C. A. (eds), Natale Conti, Mitología (Murcia, 1988), pp. 7–35 Google Scholar; Starobinski, J., ‘Fable et mythologie aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles’, in Le remède dans le mal (Paris, 1989), pp. 233-62Google Scholar.

6. Fontenelle: Niderst, A. (ed), B. de Fontenelle. Oeuvres complètes III (Paris, 1989), pp. 197–202 Google Scholar (‘De l’origine des fables’, tr. and introd. by Feldman, B. and Richardson, R. D., The Rise of Modern Mythology (1680-1860), Bloomington and London 1972, pp. 7–18)Google Scholar. Fréret: Graf, Greek Mythology, 16f, add Barret-Kriegel, B., Jean Mabillon (Paris, 1988), pp. 163–209 Google Scholar, 277–82 (bibliography).

7. Chiarini, G., ‘Ch.G. Heyne e gli inizi dello studio scientifico della mythologia’, Lares 55 (1989), 317-31Google Scholar; Graf, F., ‘Die Entstehung des Mythosbegriffs bei Christian Gottlob Heyne’, in id. (ed), Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft. Das Paradeigma Roms – Colloquium Rauricum III (Stuttgart, 1993), pp. 284-94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8. Karl M.: Calder, W. M. III et al. (eds), Karl Otfried Müller Reconsidered (Atlanta, 1995)Google Scholar. Max M.: Lloyd-Jones, H., Blood for the Ghosts (London, 1982), pp. 155-64Google Scholar; Stocking, G. W. Jr, Victorian Anthropology (New York and London, 1987), pp. 56–62 Google Scholar; van den Bosch, L. P., ‘Friedrich Max Müller: een Victoriaans geleerde over het onderzoek naar mythen en religie’, Nederlands Theol. Tijdschrift 47 (1993), 186–200 Google Scholar.

9. Cf. Bremmer, , ‘Hermann Usener’, in Briggs, W. W. and Calder, W. M. III (eds), Classical Scholarship. A Biographical Encyclopedia (New York and London, 1990), pp. 462-78Google Scholar; Dieterich, H. and von Gaertringen, F. Hiller, Usener und Wilamowitz. Ein Briefwechsel 1870–1905, revised by Calder, W. M. III (Stuttgart, 1994)Google Scholar. Mannhardt: no modern study.

10. Ackerman, R., J. G. Frazer: His Life and Work (Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar; Beard, M., ‘Frazer, Leach and Virgil: The Popularity (and Unpopularity) of The Golden Bough ’, Comp. Stud. in Soc. and Hist. 34 (1992), 203-34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. Cf. J. Mejer, ‘Martin P. Nilsson’, in Briggs/Calder, Classical Schohrship, pp. 335–40; Bierl, A. and Calder, W. M. III, ‘Instinct against Proof. The Correspondence between Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff and Martin P. Nilsson on Religionsgeschichte (1920-1930)’, Eranos 89 (1991), 73–99 Google Scholar, repr. in Calder, W. M. III, Further Letters of Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff (Hildesheim, 1994)Google Scholar.

12. Schlesier, R., ‘Prolegomena to Jane Harrison’s Interpretation of Ancient Greek Religion’, in Calder, W. M. III (ed), The Cambridge Ritualists Reconsidered (Atlanta, 1991), pp. 185–226 Google Scholar ~ Kippenberg, H. and Luchesi, B. (eds), Religionswissenschaft und Kulturkritik (Marburg, 1991), pp. 193–235 Google Scholar (German version); Bremmer, ‘Gerardus van der Leeuw and Jane Ellen Harrison’, ibid., pp. 237–41.

13. Good examples of their work in Gordon, R. (ed), Myth, Religion and Society: Structuralist Essays . . . (Cambridge, 1981)Google Scholar, with an informative introduction by R. Buxton (pp. ix-xvii).

14. Martin, R., The Language of Heroes (Ithaca, 1989), pp. 12–42 Google Scholar, esp. 12; see also Adkins, A. H. W., ‘Myth, Philosophy, and Religion in Ancient Greece’, in Reynolds, F. E. and Tracy, D. (eds), Myth and Philosophy (Albany, 1990), pp. 95–130 Google Scholar.

15. Vernant, J.-P., ‘Le mythe au réflechi’, Le temps de la réflexion 1 (1980), 21–25 Google Scholar; Detienne, M., The Creation of Mythology, 1981 1 (Chicago, 1986)Google Scholar; C. R. Philips III, ‘Misconceptualizing Classical Mythology’, in Flower/Toher, Georgica, pp. 142–51; Calame, C., ‘“Mythe” et “rite” en Grèce’, and Illusions de la mythologie (Limoges, 1991)Google Scholar.

16. See, respectively, Burkert, Structure and History, p. 23 and ‘Mythos – Begriff, Struktur, Funktionen’, in Graf, Mythos in Mythenloser Gesellschaft, pp. 9–24, esp. 17; my ‘What is a Greek Myth’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 1–9 (also on differences between myth and other types of traditional tales, such as legends, Sagen and fairy-tales). Note also Graf, Greek Mythology, pp. 1–8; Buxton, Imaginary Greece, pp. 12–17.

17. Cf. Bremmer, ‘What is a Greek Myth?’, pp. 1–3; Burkert, , ‘Typen griechischer Mythen auf dem Hintergrund mykenischer und orientalischer Tradition’, in Musti, D. et al. (eds), La transizione dal Miceneo all’ Alto Arcaismo (Rome, 1991), pp. 527-38Google Scholar.

18. Graf, Greek Mythology, p. 74 (Achilles); Grottanelli, C., ‘Yoked Horses, Twins, and the Powerful Lady: India, Greece, Ireland and Elsewhere’, J. Indo-European Stud. 14 (1986), 125-52Google Scholar (Helen); Burkert, Structure and History, pp. 78–98 (Heracles).

19. Erichthonius/Erechtheus: R. Parker, ‘Myths of Early Athens’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 187–214, esp. 194; Kearns, Heroes of Attica, p. 161.

20. Frei, P., ‘Die Bellerophontessage und das Alte Testament’, in Janowski, B. et al. (eds), Religionsgeschichtliche Beziehungen zwischen Kleinasien, Nordsyrien und dem Alten Testament (Freiburg and Göttingen, 1993), pp. 39–65 Google Scholar; note also Burkert, ‘Oriental and Greek Mythology’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 10–40.

21. Caduff, C., Antike Sintflutsagen (Göttingen, 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Burkert, , ‘Denkformen der Kosmologie im Alten Orient und in Griechenland’, in Münzel, M. (ed), Ursprung (Frankfurt, 1987), pp. 9–18 Google Scholar.

22. I follow Auffarth, Drohende Untergang, pp. 129f and Graf, Greek Mythology, pp. 95f, rather than Burkert, ‘Typen griechischer Mythen’, p. 535.

23. The late date makes it unlikely that Homer on purpose left out the motif, cf. March, J., The Creative Poet (London, 1987), pp. 27–46 Google Scholar; Bremmer, ‘La plasticité du mythe: Méléagre dans la poésie homérique’, in Calarne, Métamorphoses du mythe, pp. 37–56; Woodford, S. et al., LIMC VI.1 (1992)Google Scholar, s.v. Meleager.

24. Burkert, ‘The Making of Homer in the Sixth Century B.C.: Rhapsodes versus Stesichoros’, in Papers on theAmasis Painter, pp. 43–62, esp. 52.

25. Aphrodite: Stesichorus, fr. 223. Hera: Ap. Rhod. 1.14; Apollod. 1.9.16.

26. For Hellenistic times see now Scheer, Mythische Vorväter.

27. Families: Thomas, Oral tradition, pp. 155–95. Athens: R. Parker, ‘Myths of Early Athens’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 187–214, esp. 206f; Simon, E., LIMC VI. 1 (1992)Google Scholar, s.v. Ion. Sparta: Robert, L., Études épigraphiques et philologiques (Paris, 1938), pp. 199fGoogle Scholar (Kresphontes as a herophoric, typically Messenian name); C. Calarne, ‘Spartan Genealogies’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 153–86; M. A. Harder, ‘Euripides’ Temenos and Temenidai’, in Hofmann/Harder, Fragmenta dramatica, pp. 117–35.

28. Zeitlin, F., ‘Thebes: Theatre of Self and Society in Athenian Drama’, in Winkler, J. and eadem, (eds), Nothing to do with Dionysos? (Princeton, 1990), pp. 63–96 Google Scholar; Said, S., ‘Tragic Argos’, in Sommerstein, A. et al. (eds), Tragedy, Comedy and the Polis (Bari, 1993), pp. 167-89Google Scholar; Johnston, S., ‘Crossroads’, ZPE 88 (1991), 217-24Google Scholar.

29. Motte, Prairies et jardins; exemplary, Buxton, R., ‘Imaginary Greek Mountains’, JHS 112 (1992), 1–15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30. Detienne, M., The Gardens of Adonis, 1972 1 (Princeton, 19942)Google Scholar; R. Buxton, ‘Wolves and Werewolves in Greek Thought’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 60–79.

31. Inachus: Dowden, Death and the Maiden, pp. 123f; Katalis, S. E., LIMC V. 1 (1990)Google Scholar, s.v.; Graf, NK, 104–6 (Acheloos).

32. Good observations towards such a project in Dowden, Uses of Greek Mythology, pp. 121–49; Buxton, Imaginary Greece, pp. 80–113.

33. Oral tradition: Thomas, Oral Tradition, p. 283. Fosterage: Bremmer/Horsfall, Roman Myth, pp. 53–6 (Bremmer).

34. Genre: Seaford, R., ‘The Structural Problems of Marriage in Euripides’, in Powell, A. (ed), Euripides, Women, and Sexuality (London and New York, 1990), pp. 151-76CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Father-son: Sourvinou-Inwood, ‘Reading’ Greek Culture, pp. 244–84.

35. Brother-sister: Bremmer, , ‘Why did Medea Kill Her Brother Apsyrtos?’, in Clauss, J. and Johnston, S. (eds), Aeetes’ Daughter. Essays on Medea . . . (Princeton, 1995)Google Scholar. Troilus: Kossatz-Deissman, A., LIMC I.1 (1981)Google Scholar, s.v. Achilleus, no. 206–388; Wathelet, P., Dictionnaire des Troyens de l’lliade, 2 vls (Liège, 1988)Google Scholar, s.v. Troilos.

36. For a detailed historical survey of the various approaches see Versnel, , Inconsistencies 2, pp. 15–88 Google Scholar (~ Edmunds, Approaches, pp. 25–90).

37. See, respectively, Lardinois, A., ‘Greek Myths for Athenian Rituals’, GRBS 33 (1992), 313-27Google Scholar; A. Pariente, ‘Le monument argien des “Sept contra Thebes’”, in Piérart, Polydipsion Argos, pp. 195–229; Graf, NK, 391 (Tarentum). In general: Richardson, N., ‘Innovazione poetica e mutamenti religiosi nell’antica Grecia’, Stud. Or. Class. 33 (1983), pp. 15–27 Google Scholar.

38. Burkert, Orientalizing Revolution, pp. 83–5; add Pomponius Mela 1.64 (tourists); Harvey, P. B., ‘The Death of Mythology: The Case of Joppa’, J. Early Christ. Stud. 2 (1994), 1–14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39. Cf. Jameson, M., ‘Perseus, the Hero of Mykenai’, in Hägg, R. and Nordquist, G. (eds), Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid (Stockholm, 1990), pp. 213-30Google Scholar. Bulls’ masks: Ovid, Met. 10.222-37; Graf, NK, 415f; Hermary, A., Rep. Dept. Antiq. Cyprus 1986, 164-6Google Scholar; id. and O. Masson, ‘Deux vases inscrits du sanctuaire d’Aphrodite à Amathunte’, Bull. Con. Hell. 114 (1990), 187–214. Helmets: Brijder, H., Siana Cups II. The Heidelberg Painter (Amsterdam, 1991), pp. 430-2Google Scholar; see also Graf, NK, 415f (bull warriors). Minotaur: Woodford, S., LIMC VI. 1 (1992)Google Scholar, s.v.

40. One may have some qualms about the historic reality of the ambiguity of Versnel’s reconstructed ritual complex, since for Rhodes our information speaks only of a negative ritual and regarding Athens only of a positive one. Is it methodologically permitted to obliterate local differences in this way? Or is the reconstruction valid only for a ‘deep’ structure and, if so, what is then the relationship with the ‘surface’ of the ritual?

41. Versnel, Inconsistencies 2, pp. 88–135 (~ Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 121–52). Versnel also discusses iconographical representations of a veiled Kronos which, contrary to his suggestion (104f), all post-date the classical period, cf. E. B. Serbeti, LIMC VI. 1 (1992), s.v.

42. See also Buxton, Imaginary Greece, p. 96 (myth/life), pp. 151–5 (myth/ritual).

43. Lemnos: Burkert, Homo necans, pp. 190–6. Pegasus: Frei, ‘Bellerophontessage’, 48f. Migrating myths: Graf, , ‘Das Götterbild aus dem Taurerland’, Antike Welt 10.4 (1979), 33–41 Google Scholar and Greek Mythology, pp. 116f.

44. I have not the space to enter in a discussion of the sociobiological explanations by Burkert, Structure and History, pp. 1–58, and Versnel, Inconsistencies 2, pp. 79–88 (~ Edmunds, Approaches, pp. 62–7) of some myth and ritual complexes, but see the objections of Bremmer/Horsfall, Roman Myth, pp. 29f (Bremmer); Auffarth, Drohende Untergang, pp. 573–82; Bremmer, , ‘Mythe en rite in het oude Griekenland’, Nederlands Theol. Tijdschrift 46 (1992), 265-76Google Scholar; Graf, Greek Mythology, pp. 52f.

45. See now also Gantz, T., Early Greek Myth: a guide to literary and artistic sources, 2 vls (Baltimore and London, 1993)Google Scholar.

46. Moret, J.-M., ‘The Earliest Representations of the Infant Herakles and the Snakes’, in Braswell, B. K., A Commentary on Pindar Nemean One (Fribourg, 1992), pp. 83–90 Google Scholar.

47. Neils, J., LIMC VI. 1 (1992)Google Scholar, s.v. Iason, no. 30–5. Recently, a small fragment of archaic Argonauta poetry has been published: P. Oxy. 53.3698, mentioning Orpheus, Mopsus, and Aeetes.

48. Note now also Knell, H., Mythos und Polis. Bildprogramme griechischer Bauskulptur (Darmstadt, 1990)Google Scholar; Carpenter, T., Art and Myth in Ancient Greece (London, 1991)Google Scholar; Shapiro, H., Myth into Art (London, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49. Shapiro, H., ‘Old and New Heroes: Narrative, Composition, and Subject in Attic Black-Figure’, Class. Ant. 9 (1990), 114-48CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Note also the table with changes on the Attic panel amphoras in Scheibler, I., ‘Bild und Gefäss ...’, JDAI 102 (1987), 57–118, esp. 89Google Scholar.

50. Bremmer, , ‘The Old Women of Ancient Greece’, in Blok, J. and Mason, P. (eds), Sexual Asymmetry. Studies in Ancient Society (Amsterdam, 1987), pp. 191–215 Google Scholar, esp. 200f.

51. Cf. A. Henrichs, ‘Three Approaches to Greek Mythography’, in Bremmer, Interpretations, pp. 242–77; Mactoux, M.-M., ‘Panthéon et discours mythologique: le cas d’Apollodore’, Rev. Hist. Rel. 206 (1989), 245-70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jacob, C., ‘Le savoir des mythographes’, Annales ESC 49 (1994), 419-28Google Scholar.