05-30-2012, 07:45 AM
of Comparative Mythology in a rubber dingy.
(This is not exactly about poetry, but it is about a field that does interact with it fairly often, but don't expect tips to writing poetry here)
This popped into my head the other day regarding dealing with comparative mythology. As poets are likely to stumble into the field and get burrs, I thought I would pass it on, even if it only keeps one person alive!
When trying to find similarities, especially between gods, disregard names and look for similarity in events, and within those events character types. For example, ” Prometheus created humankind, and defied Zeus’s order not to give humans the gift of fire.”
Prometheus of course is a titan, so he can’t be a god, correct? Wrong. At least in this story he has the strongest correlation to the Babylonian/Sumerian god Enki/Ea, who was the half brother of the head of the gods Enlil. In Sumerian mythology it is generally Enki who is said to create the “Adom” - man, although as is often the case, Enlil may try to take the credit because it was during his reign. Enki was also the god in charge of the mes, which were groupings of information. There are strong suggestions (although sources are fragmented) that it was through Enki that men acquired different types of knowledge (fire) when he distributed the mes to the other gods, then they used these to assist the humans as they struggled for survival after the flood. It is quite possible there is a story of Enlil imprisoning Enki that could be similar to the above, although it has yet to be found, and there do seem to be stories related to some type of exile for Enki and his family to the south of Sumner in the area of Egypt.
In the Bible there is also a lot of talk of knowledge being given to man, but it has the negative connotation that it is not good for humans to get knowledge, as in the story of the apple. Later, this knowledge sharing appears to be part of what causes God to go postal and flood the earth. In the Biblical story it seems to be more the fallen angels mating with human women that ticked God off.
Genesis 6 NAS
“1Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were [a]beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “ My Spirit shall not [b]strive with man forever, [c] because he also is flesh; [d]nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved [e]in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “ I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the [f]sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.”
However, in the extra-Biblical sources we find a much more detailed account, and that knowledge sharing was a big part of it, even to listing the names of the angels and what they shared (I think what really broke the camels back was giving women the knowledge of cosmetics.. no, really it does) There is a very clear account of the flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh (or a fragmented account in Sumerian “Epic of Atrahasis”), where Noah by another name (don’t make me look it up, oh, OK, “Utnapishtim”) is warned by a god that the flood was coming and what to do (build a big boat, blah, blah, blah). What god you ask? Why our friend god Enki of course. Who, by the way, is generally associated with the realm of water, especially the oceans. That would mean he is Poseidon, Zeus’ brother and…. Nope. don’t go there.
The point? Don’t try and find one to one correlations between names, in fact throw out the names, it will surely lead you down the road to some kind of hell. However, what there are strong correlations to is character type. What we might do in the above is look at the general character of the “Knowledge Giver” and ask does his story/character appear across cultures? Are there similarities between those he opposes? The character of “King-god”? Within this specific story as well as several others there is even a stronger correlation between “the King-god” characters. However my friend, do not attempt to carry this correlation outside of the story and attempt to equate A with B in all instances. That is the way to maddens.
Seriously though, the reason to take the character approach is that it is much more likely the story has moved from one culture to another, but that new culture will tell it within the context that makes sense to it. So if in the story as told by the Greeks there is a high correlation between knowledge and fire (the Greek, not the Latin), an adaptation makes perfect sense, even more so to give that King of the gods in the story, the name of yours, after all, the Babylonians changed his name to Marduk. (I always knew there was some correlation between god=dog) Cultures are like that :p
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just for further fun: Although Enki is the main figure in both stories of the giving of knowledge, in the bible people often assume it is Satan tempting Eve, however in the book of Enoch as well as some other extra-biblical sources, the head knowledge giver, or at least the head of those angels who were giving out knowledge and mating with human females, was an angel named Azazel. Have fun!
Dale
Disclaimer: This was done quickly as my time is limited. What that means is don't expect a finely edited piece that is absolutely clear in what it is saying. Sorry, this ended up being longer than I thought it would take and I'm to tired to make it better.
(This is not exactly about poetry, but it is about a field that does interact with it fairly often, but don't expect tips to writing poetry here)
This popped into my head the other day regarding dealing with comparative mythology. As poets are likely to stumble into the field and get burrs, I thought I would pass it on, even if it only keeps one person alive!
When trying to find similarities, especially between gods, disregard names and look for similarity in events, and within those events character types. For example, ” Prometheus created humankind, and defied Zeus’s order not to give humans the gift of fire.”
Prometheus of course is a titan, so he can’t be a god, correct? Wrong. At least in this story he has the strongest correlation to the Babylonian/Sumerian god Enki/Ea, who was the half brother of the head of the gods Enlil. In Sumerian mythology it is generally Enki who is said to create the “Adom” - man, although as is often the case, Enlil may try to take the credit because it was during his reign. Enki was also the god in charge of the mes, which were groupings of information. There are strong suggestions (although sources are fragmented) that it was through Enki that men acquired different types of knowledge (fire) when he distributed the mes to the other gods, then they used these to assist the humans as they struggled for survival after the flood. It is quite possible there is a story of Enlil imprisoning Enki that could be similar to the above, although it has yet to be found, and there do seem to be stories related to some type of exile for Enki and his family to the south of Sumner in the area of Egypt.
In the Bible there is also a lot of talk of knowledge being given to man, but it has the negative connotation that it is not good for humans to get knowledge, as in the story of the apple. Later, this knowledge sharing appears to be part of what causes God to go postal and flood the earth. In the Biblical story it seems to be more the fallen angels mating with human women that ticked God off.
Genesis 6 NAS
“1Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were [a]beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “ My Spirit shall not [b]strive with man forever, [c] because he also is flesh; [d]nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved [e]in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “ I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the [f]sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.”
However, in the extra-Biblical sources we find a much more detailed account, and that knowledge sharing was a big part of it, even to listing the names of the angels and what they shared (I think what really broke the camels back was giving women the knowledge of cosmetics.. no, really it does) There is a very clear account of the flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh (or a fragmented account in Sumerian “Epic of Atrahasis”), where Noah by another name (don’t make me look it up, oh, OK, “Utnapishtim”) is warned by a god that the flood was coming and what to do (build a big boat, blah, blah, blah). What god you ask? Why our friend god Enki of course. Who, by the way, is generally associated with the realm of water, especially the oceans. That would mean he is Poseidon, Zeus’ brother and…. Nope. don’t go there.
The point? Don’t try and find one to one correlations between names, in fact throw out the names, it will surely lead you down the road to some kind of hell. However, what there are strong correlations to is character type. What we might do in the above is look at the general character of the “Knowledge Giver” and ask does his story/character appear across cultures? Are there similarities between those he opposes? The character of “King-god”? Within this specific story as well as several others there is even a stronger correlation between “the King-god” characters. However my friend, do not attempt to carry this correlation outside of the story and attempt to equate A with B in all instances. That is the way to maddens.
Seriously though, the reason to take the character approach is that it is much more likely the story has moved from one culture to another, but that new culture will tell it within the context that makes sense to it. So if in the story as told by the Greeks there is a high correlation between knowledge and fire (the Greek, not the Latin), an adaptation makes perfect sense, even more so to give that King of the gods in the story, the name of yours, after all, the Babylonians changed his name to Marduk. (I always knew there was some correlation between god=dog) Cultures are like that :p
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just for further fun: Although Enki is the main figure in both stories of the giving of knowledge, in the bible people often assume it is Satan tempting Eve, however in the book of Enoch as well as some other extra-biblical sources, the head knowledge giver, or at least the head of those angels who were giving out knowledge and mating with human females, was an angel named Azazel. Have fun!
Dale
Disclaimer: This was done quickly as my time is limited. What that means is don't expect a finely edited piece that is absolutely clear in what it is saying. Sorry, this ended up being longer than I thought it would take and I'm to tired to make it better.
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
