|
Author
|
Topic: Seeking the Truth from Mythology
|
Seigneur de Leon
Member
Member # 65
|
posted 12-06-2001 02:01 PM
    
In another thread, it was brought up that the Viking Sagas were "fairy tales", and could not be considered as any basis of fact. The Song of Roland, some of the stories in Froisant's Chronicles as well as the Old Testament in the Bible all have been word of mouth written long after the events allegedly took place. But these are sometimes true accounts of actual events that have grown in the telling.
We know every species of animal on earth didn't descend from one pair on Noah's ark, nor was the earth entirely flooded. However, as glaciers melted, perhaps the Mediteranean Sea flooded into the Black Sea, with the heavier cold fresh water not mixing with the warmer salt water. And perhaps Noah lived on a hill which became an island, and is now one of the submerged ruins 200' down that was recently discovered, more or less intact, due to the low oxygen of the trapped fresh water. As the water raised maybe he told his family to load a pair of every animal on their farm to maintain and rebuild his divergent herds before setting out for better parts. As he survived, his story became the story, and his world was completely flooded.
So do we discount the biblical account entirely for the above reasons, or should we be digging for that shred of truth (that I may or may not be even close at) that lies behind the story?
What about the attitudes of the peoples involved? These stories & myths may also shed some light on their culture, what they believed, & how they felt about the world around them. The way they prized their warriors, the armour and weapons used, and the unusual as well as the usual may in fact be seen in such stories.
Comments?-------------------- VERITAS IN INTIMO
VIRES IN LACERTU
SIMPLICITAS IN EXPRESSO
Registered: Nov 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gwen
Member
Member # 126
|
posted 12-06-2001 07:22 PM
Why are they useful as sources of information? As far as I can tell they contain no information, just a good story. Like I said, if you or anyone else can back up any of these stories (pick a culture/country/period/whatever) with FACTS, then it becomes useful source of information and for research beyond its entertainment, spiritual and/or moral value. Like the cops say- "Just the facts please!". Of course this is just my take on it, I can't speak for anyone but myself. Gwen
Registered: Feb 2001 | IP: Logged
|
|
Acelynn
Member
Member # 220
|
posted 12-07-2001 08:52 AM
Seigneur, I must say that you got me wondering about things last night. From my limited study of the Sagas such as the Elder Edda, I found that some scholars have concluded that there were many verifiable facts in them with regards to the clothing, weaponry, the history of Scandanavia and even sometimes the individuals in them. They all seem to agree that some portions have been "embroidered" by the skalds but some have not. It makes me wonder things just like you. Every single work of literature whether non-fiction or not, is influenced by what is going on in the writer's world at that time. Sometimes an unusual circumstance can give rise to a whole body of work or a single reference. Such as the Amazons of Greek mythology. The concept of accomplished equestrian warrior women were generally "sniggered" at by scholars and reduced to "legend" status for many years. (The French still use the term "amazone" to describe a highly skilled female equestrian, BTW) Then all of the sudden archeaologists begin unearthing graves in what was ancient Scythia with female skeletons in armor and with weapons. What conclusion do you draw then? Personally, I say that it means there really were female equestrian warriors in Scythia and some Greek writers and historians developed the Amazon legend around them. In fact, I think that is one of the reasons the Greeks were so ready to point out how "unnatural" they were, precisely because the concept of a female warrior was hugely inappropriate in Greek society who valued women only slightly lower than a good hunting dog. (I'm pointedly ignoring the Athenian Heraklai here--they were notable for their huge exception to the norm) This has become a bit of a ramble, but at least it's on the off topic portion  I firmly believe that you can find kernels of truth in legends, whether they are Viking Sagas, Greek Myth, the Song of Roland (which has a female warrior too BTW) or stories of King Arthur. Do I "believe" that King Arthur lived as Chretien d'Troyes and Thomas Mallory describe him in plate armor with formal tournaments? No, that was how those two men, writing for their own time, believed a noble king should live. However, I know individuals like Aurelius Ambrosianus (who may well be the inspiration for Arthur)existed. Aurelius was a Romanized Celt who served a tribal confederation as a dux bellorum against the Saxon and Jute invaders. He was not a king, he was the war leader of a tribal confederation. However, it is very easy to see how a successful Celtic dux bellorum later made the transition in legend to King Arthur. Legends and traditions usually become that way because they began in a real circumstance and got handed down and "improved" upon as time went by. Godiva and her husband Leofric really lived (they have actually proven that). Now did she ride through town naked to protest her husband's taxes? Probably not, but isn't it possible that she did try to "soften" her husband in his dealings with his serfs and grateful vassals remembered it and later told tales that, like Topsy, "just grew?" Separating "fact" from "fiction" is never an easy task, but to write off any possible source of study is, IMO, poor use of scholarly techniques. BTW, there are extra credit points available to anyone who understands my reference and source of Topsy  Aha, the evil Literature Major strikes again.... Be Well friends,
Acelynn [ 12-07-2001: Message edited by: Acelynn ]
Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
NEIL G
Member
Member # 187
|
posted 12-07-2001 12:49 PM
Two points, plus one for luck;
a) Sagas and equivalent literature are primary sources from the period, and tell us as much about objects OF THAT CLASS (in this case, literature) as any other surviving object - think of them as a nonphysical artefact.
b) Use of sagas etc to tell us about other classes of object they describe is the approximate equivalent of using modern TV to tell you about the twentieth century, ie highly variable. You may get excellent data about it if you tune into (say) Hill Street Blues, but less so if it's Xena, Warrior Princess. c) I don't know much about the sagas, but an archaeologist in the UK has done a lot of work on the irish celtic cycle of tales, and a lot of the archefacts are apparently an excellent match with excavated finds....of artefacts from the late viking period, a generation or two before the tales are written down.
Registered: Jun 2001 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
posted 12-07-2001 01:55 PM
