Building a mythic hero
 

This was an interesting page.

The mythical pattern of a hero

1. Hero's mother is a royal virgin;
2. His father is a king, and
3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grand father to kill him, but
7. he is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster -parents in a far country.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future Kingdom.
11. After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and
13. And becomes king.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and
15. Prescribes laws, but
16. Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
18. He meets with a mysterious death,
19. Often at the top of a hill,
20. His children, if any do not succeed him.
21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Logically, 14..22 would outline the plot for Star Wars eps 7..9 -- but Hollywood would never go for such a downer. On the other hand, it would make it a nice cycle for ascendancy switching from Light Side to Dark and back.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Hmm, let's check with the Ur-example of heroes, Gilgamesh.

1. Hero's mother is a royal virgin - not that I heard of.
2. His father is a king - apparently.
3. Often a near relative of his mother - no idea, probably not.
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual - 33%/33%/33% mix sure is unusual.
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god - yes.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grand father to kill him - not that I know of.
7. he is spirited away - apparently not.
8. Reared by foster -parents in a far country - apparently not.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood - seems so.
10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future Kingdom - sort of.
11. After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast - okay, there was a victory over a wild person; does it count?
12. He marries a princess - this is Gilgamesh, so apparently not.
13. And becomes king - stays king, basically.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully - sort of.
15. Prescribes laws, but - maybe.
16. Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects - probably counts.
17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which - does a quest count as driven out?
18. He meets with a mysterious death - I suppose you can say that.
19. Often at the top of a hill - wasn't it a shore?
20. His children, if any do not succeed him - I'm not sure we can know.
21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless - taken to be king of the Netherworld with the body?
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres - no idea.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

There's some fairly forced logic there. Consider:
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
Now, for Arthur Pendragon:
(5) reputed to be the son of Uther Pendragon,
and the author says that Arthur matches qualification 5....

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I wouldn't expect all heroes to have to match every point. That's carrying things a bit too far, putting the form over the substance.

On the other hand, the fact that there are variations and deviations doesn't invalidate the observation that there's a common pattern to a lot of mythical stories. It might be more interesting, academically, to study the differences rather than try to force-fit every story to the master pattern.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Yeah, I don't think King Arthur qualifies on # 5.

And Jesus? The author also messed that up. God isn't a 'close relative' of the Virgin Mary.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Oh, that's not what he's saying (he's saying Joseph is a close relative of Mary), though he's still wrong. Let's look at his list:
1. mother is a royal virgin -- not even close to true, I don't think we have a geneology for Mary (as opposed to Joseph, for whom we have two contradictory ones), and in any case, 42 generations later != royal virgin
2. father is a king -- we have a geneology of Joseph, and see 42 generations.
3. near relative of his mother -- no evidence for this being true.
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual -- I'll grant this one.
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god -- this one too.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grand father to kill him -- partially true
7. he is spirited away -- sure, we'll accept that one.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood -- valid.
10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future Kingdom -- he never becomes a king, but this is close enough.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully -- teaching and reigning are not the same.
15. Prescribes laws -- iffy, there's no ten commandments equivalent.
16. Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects -- I guess I can grant this, based on Judas
18. He meets with a mysterious death -- crucifixion isn't particularly mysterious.
19. Often at the top of a hill -- well, sure, but not very meaningful.
20. His children, if any do not succeed him -- granted
21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless -- well, he was entombed, but it was temporary, so we'll grant this one.
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres -- the sepulchre was built centuries after the relevant books were written; I'm not going to count 'building a shrine' unless it occurs as part of the myth.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Look, the important thing was to give a template with which to build mythical heroes, for roleplaying purposes. Not to argue that everyone who is a mythic hero conforms exactly to this template.

The headline reads "Incidents which occur with regularity in hero-myths of all cultures", not "Incidents which occur in all hero-myths."

Edit: Also, just because you reach a high score doesn't mean that you never existed. See Mithridates of Pontus. Only that a lot of legends have sprung up around the person. Given that there are 40 Gospels it is hard for a Christian to argue that there aren't legends and myths surrounding Christ.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all you strength; and your neighbor as yourself" seems pretty prescriptive.

Bill Stoddard

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Oh, I happily grant that Jesus is among other things, a mythic hero. But 'mythic' does not mean 'false.'

I was just nitpicking certain parts of the list as applied to Jesus by the author.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Okay, I had to do a little quick research. My first thought was that the source had cribbed from Unca Joe Campbell, but I see the source of the list, The Hero: A study in Tradition, Myth and Dreams by Lord Raglan pre-dated Joseph Campbell's The Hero With a Thousand Faces by nearly a decade. Interesting.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I can see a
If more then half of these are true you are probably a mythic hero quiz in a adventurers magazine

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

He also said:

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

True. The main difference is that there are know political or judicial commandments(other then "be a good citizen" and "enforce internal order") and no cultic ones(other then Baptism and Communion). Torah was meant for the organization of a nation, not a universalist religion.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

1. Quite rare. More common for heroes to be divine bastards. I can't remember any virgin births other then Jesus and Darth Vader. I suspect that Ancients found celestial kinkiness more arousing.

2. Fairly normal. Besides rule of cool, it is a convenient way to explain why the Hero is interested in high politics.

3. As most people are near relations to their mother, I assume you mean the parents were practicing endogamy. Fairly common among nobility and among scattered populations.

4. And often quite fearsome. Ghengis Khan was grasping a blood clot and Ivan the Terrible had an eclipse or a thunderstorm I forget which. Paul Atreides' mother rebelled against the Bene Geserit.

5. More common then virgin births.

6. Quite common

7. Also common. Supposedly happened to Cyrus the Great.

8. Ditto

9. Common though there are exceptions. Turin Turumbar had a tender relation with his father's retainer.

10. Quite common

11. Note Aragorn, Paul Atreides, etc.

12. And she is always very beautiful. Justifiable when you think about it as commoner women have to work and haven't access to cosmetics.

13. Of course

14. Not necessarily. Being a great conqueror is always fun.

15. Varies. Often these are military laws to improve the new monarchs army. "United the tribes" is also popular and is naturally associated with prescribing laws. All perfectly natural.

16. A favorite of the Greeks. Jews liked it too though sometimes he repented and won favor back. Sometimes favor of the gods is lost by the heroes descendants. Also the waning phase of the Cycle of Empires is a popular alternative and among highly religious cultures is pretty much the same thing.

17. Naturally. A lot of thrones depended on Klingon Promotion.

18. Of course. And the body is never found.

19. Huh?

20. Unless it is the founding myth of a dynasty.

21. Well, yes

22. You forgot about being enchanted so he can return and rescue his people.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Joseph Campbell wrote about this extensively in THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES and THE MASKS OF GOD, and before him James Frazer in THE GOLDEN BOUGH.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

What about "Blessed are the cheesemakers?".

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I don't remember any commandment regarding cheese. Other then that most Jews don't eat meat with dairy which sounds like kind of an extreme extrapolation but whatever.

If you are however referring indirectly to "blessed are the peacemakers" that was referring to all relations rather then simply political ones which commoners in an autocratic empire would have had little say in in any case.

But "be a good citizen" is implied in "render unto Caesar." And "enforce internal order" is implied in a couple of instances one of which was where Paul rebuked a Church for going to magistrates instead of arbitrating themselves, and another where Paul ordered someone banned for incest and adultery.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I could have been referring to "The heroes deeds/message become warped in the retelling".

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

You could have meant that. But that would be uninteresting, because there is no more discussion to be made on that point, unimaginitive because that claim is brought up by every hack-historian, and because it is an arbitrary assertion which cannot possibly be disproved as any possible contrary evidence can be claimed as a fake. And just plain wearisome because if you believe you have to deny that claim and if you disbelieve you have to accept it and there is no more to be said. And the details of a given story are more interesting then whether a given person believes them in the context of this thread.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

It might have been uninteresting but at least it was short.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

That is a only a virtue in Sparta.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Change that to:
5a. He is the subject of a prophecy.
And you rope in Anakin Skywalker, Neo from Matrix and Harry Potter, to name those that immediately come to mind.


Mithras, at least, and there are others I've heard of.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Romulus and Remus. Siddharta Gautauma. Perseus.

Google turns up Amunothph III (Egypt), Attis (Phrygia), Fohi (China), Plato (Greece), Adonis (Greece), Quetzalcoatl (Mexico), Hercules (Greece), Indra (Tibet), Devaki (India), Alexander the Great (Greece), Augustus (Rome).

All of these have been attributed to virgin births. I doubt it.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I interpreted the line about royal virgins as the mother having been one until the hero's father came along.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Which only requires a palace with an efficient security system and not a myth.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

So? Not every requirement needs to be confined to myth and legend. The bit about the father being a king is even less in need of mythology to apply.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Incorrect for a number of those cases Asta.

A god having sex with a mortal woman and producing a child thereby is not a virgin birth.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

It only says "mother is a royal virgin", not necessarily that it has to be a virgin birth. I'd say it's an ambiguous statement, but given that my interpretation gives a greater coverage of mythic heroes it's a more useful one.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Nitpick: The mother can't be a virgin and a mother if she's had intercourse with a man or a god, Asta. She can have been a virgin before she conceived, but not before she gave birth, if sexual congress was involved. But sure, your reading is broader and probably more useful! :)





The Virgin Birth (and its corollary, the perpetual virginity of Mary) is quite different from Greek stories of Zeus dallying with mortal women.


The idea that a god could take on flesh, or that a being could be both divine and human in nature, in its broadest sense that forms an area of overlap between Christianity and certain pagan traditions. Christianity is arguably a sort of Hellenistic-Judaic fusion.
At the risk of getting off-topic, I think that 'pagan' myths of man-gods, demigods, and incarnations of divine powers may have helped to 'pave the way' for many Gentiles to convert to the new religion, just as the concept of the Incarnation seems to have repelled many 'old school/anti-Hellenic' Jews.

But of course I'm oversimplifying things...

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

It's worth noting that some of the deity origin stories have parthenogenesis of one form or another - Athena springing forth from her Father's head, fully formed, is a form of parthenogenetic reproduction - albeit a fanciful one.

Uranus, Pontus and Oreia were all said by some sources to have been born of Gaia without copulation, but by the normal means of pregnancy and birth.

Tefnut and Shu are products of Atum's masturbation, or a sneeze, or an expectoration, depending upon which era's texts one consults... equally as fanciful as Athena. But at least, in some versions, getting that they're born of sexual matter.

Born of a mother who had not known a father sexually is a common element amongst several panthons with a primordial mother-goddess. But it's almost always within the ranks of full gods, rather than heroes.

The Christian version really is predicated upon the duality of Spirit and Body, and that the Virgin Birth is the sending of spirit inseminating the body. I recall reading of a non-christian demigod origin where the mortal mother conceived by the hearing of a song by a fertility god. It's a clear parallel.

Remember that, for the most part, Early Classical Greeks were pretty much concretist, tho' certain greek philosophers introduced the duality of Essence and Accident - the platonic ideal and the physical presence. We experience the accident, which is prototyped in the essence and is a shadow of that essence. (See Plato, the Cave)

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Once you postulate gods that reproduce like humans you have to figure out how the first one came, which necessarily requires either spontaneous generation or a mysterious Greater God That Doesn't Usually Appear In Stories.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

[QUOTE=combatmedic;1579290





The Virgin Birth (and its corollary, the perpetual virginity of Mary) is [/QUOTE]

Fortunately, not being Catholic I am not required to wish the later on her. The former would have been hard enough, though I suspect if they thought Joseph was the real father they would not have come down to hard on her. You never know though.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

The Law requires that a husband who discovers his wife is not a virgin on her wedding night to take her to her father's doorstep and stone her. Unless he raped her, in which case he is forced to marry her.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

The "perpetual virginity of Mary" doesn't match the source - reference Matthew 1:25 (in which it is said Joseph "knows" Mary after the birth of Jesus) and Acts 1:14 (which uses the Greek "adelphoi" to refer to Jesus' brothers).

So, like many of the mythic-hero myths, this origin was a one-off.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

The passage makes it obvious that Torah was sometimes fudged and that that wasn't always held a bad thing.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Well, yes. Kings and Chronicles make it very clear that such fudging was the reason for the fall of Judah and Israel. Man was too corrupt to follow God's Laws. But if you believe in the Laws' God-given origin they say some very interesting things about God's sense of justice. In fact we learn from Jesus that the Law was really much too lenient, at least in certain ways.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

That part of the comment was meant to be sociological not theological. But if you must know, Deut 22: 13 clearly implies that the groom was allowed to refrain from pressing charges.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

After checking, yes, that would seem to be correct. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Actually, no, it doesn't say what you seem to think it says.

You are bringing up old errors which were dealt with a long, long time ago.


http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3007.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm

On the second page, scroll down to the section on her perpetual virginity. It is all explained quite clearly.


BTW, Martin Luther accepted Mary's perpetual virginity and John Calvin thought it not appropriate to question the matter.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Not really. On this subject Catholics appear to me to indulge in a mental sleight of hand that reverses the burden of proof. It seems to me that the default aqssumption must be that God would want Joseph and Mary to live together as the Bible tells us he wants married people to live together. That the Bible doesn't explicitly mention that they did means nothing. Does it explicitly say that they didn't? You'd expect married people to consumate their marriage on their wedding night, and so the Bible explicitly tells us that Joseph and Mary didn't. But you'd also expect married people to live together as man and wife, and the Bible does not say that they did not, once Jesus was born. Hence Mathew 1:25 does in fact say exactly what Rob thinks it says; it can be twisted to mean something else, but the straightforward interpretation is the most reasonable one. The other interpretation seems to me to be made up of whole cloth without any support from the Bible.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Not ignoring. Submitting the opinion that tradition and the writing of the Church Fathers seem to be made up of whole cloth without any support from the Bible.

As for the nuances of translation, are you telling me that the original text CANNOT be interpreted to mean that Joseph and Mary lived together as man and wife and had more children after Jesus?

I agree that it is not a sectarian issue, so I don't see what Martin Luther and other reformers of note have to do with the case.

Just to be clear: I'm not setting up as an authority on the Bible. I merely state that I've never seen any quotes from the Bible that supported the notion of Mary's perpetual virginity.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Evangelicals don't necessarily. That is unfortunately because they play down the scholarship. They are admirable at clothing the naked, visiting the sick, and coming unto the imprisoned, etc but less so at meditating on the Word of God. Few of them know much about the early history of the Church etc. That is changing with the political and social alliance with Catholics in recent years. Kind of like sturdy Romans meeting sophisticated Greeks.

By the way the "they" is deliberate. I nondenominationalized myself awhile ago(over exclusivism; I think Catholics are closer to being right on that one and that an Arminianism that ends at physical death is a de facto Calvinism which is intolerable). As guests are allowed to take Communion there is no problem.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

In other words, there is no evidence of Mary's perpetual virginity to be found in the Bible?

Who says I accept the authority of the Bible? But to answer your question, even if I did, it does not follow. That was the essence of many of the Reformation movements. That interpretation of the Bible was a matter for each individual.

But be that as it may, the question under discussion is about what the Bible says and doesn't say. What tradition and the Church Fathers say is not evidence of what the Bible says. That would merely be surrendering my own judgement to that of Authority.

Would a reasonable man reading the Bible without benefit of the Wisdom of the Church Fathers get the impression from Matthew 1:25 and other bits of scripture that Joseph and Mary had a perfectly traditional marriage after the birth of Jesus? I believe so.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

So tell me which part of the original text of the Bible says that Mary remained a perpetual virgin.

As I said, I consider the default assumption to be that she didn't.

What apparent discrepancies? As far as I can tell, the discrepancies is between what the Bible actually says and what the Church Fathers would have preferred it to say.

(I read up on it the last time we had this discussion. Not this time, I admit).


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I wonder if we should separate religious heroes as a sub-category. The stories about them are usually a different cup of tea in the major religions. Some religious heroes are warriors and comparable to the old myths. But others are contemplatives or missionaries or something of the kind and their stories don't sound the same. A saint's tale or equiv has it's own aesthetic attraction but it isn't the same as that of a saga.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Maybe, although the line between hero and saint can be blurry, or no line at all.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Obviously. If it did, there wouldn't be any controversy.

And when she gave birth to him. The Bible explicitly says so.

You're wrong there as far as I'm concerned. I think that Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage after Jesus was born because that's supposed to be God's purpose with the institution of marriage. I don't need to point out the grammatic implications of the Greek word for 'until' or the mention of Jesus' brothers to prove that, because I don't think it requires proof. I think the opposite view is the one that requires proof. And I don't think it exists.


Yes, yes, I get that there's no proof (as opposed to evidence) that Mary didn't remain a virgin her whole life. As I pointed out above, if there were any such proof, there wouldn't be any discussion about it, would there?

But where's the evidence to support it?

In addition to the argument above, I also think... no, better not; my other reason is somewhat irreverent, and I don't want to cause offense.

All I can say that I've never seen any arguments except those that show why the Bible doesn't actually disprove the notion.

Because what they say seems wrong to me. So I'm asking for proof by evidence. Proof by Authority doesn't really work for me.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

I've provided links. If you are interested in learning more about the tradition of Mary's presentation to the temple, beliefs about her vow of lifelong virginity, the special nature of her role as Mother of God, where and why text of the Bible actually supports the idea of her only child being Jesus (it's explained in the magazine articles I linked) it's all there. Just read the material when you have time, and PM me your comments once you are familiar with the material.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Ewan, I read that link the first time you provided it. I've just reread it, and it does not show where and why the text of the Bible actually support the idea of Mary's only child being Jesus. It simply asserts that such is the case and claims that the Bible doesn't disprove such an assertation. Unless, of course, it shows it somewhere other than in the section headlined "Mary's perpetual virginity' -- I have not read the whole text from top to bottom.

If it does show any such thing anywhere, please provide an actual quote from the text you linked to. If you can't, we've reached the same impasse that we reached the first time you made this claim.


Hans

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Taken from Tim Staples' article:

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

As a very thoroughly lapsed Southern Baptist (haven't been to worship since I was 7 but I retain some fundamentals) I can tell you that the reason these things are not studied is because of the belief that they are irrelevant if not fallacious.

It's all about that phrase "Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Savior?" which probably sounds odd to many of you. It's the "personal" that's important. It cuts out the whole "Church" (like there was only one and they were it) thing.

Salvation and proper guidance flows directly from the Savior and is not filtered through umpty-ump generations of "Church Fathers" or any current hierarchy claiming investment of special powers and/or authority .

If we were formulating truly rigorous classification schemes many Evangelicals would not just be "Protestants" (opposed to the key leadership and some of the practices of the RCC) but probably something more like "Rejectionists" (rejecting the basic concept including sacred priesthood and Apostolic Succession).

Please note that I am not personally invested in any of this. It does not come close to any of my own personal beliefs. It just seemed to me that some of the people involved in this discussion did not quite grasp the full range of contemporary religious opinions

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

My mother was raised as a Southern Baptist. My father's family included a mix of denominations, but some were SB (at one point booted out of their local church for continuing in their heathenish ways of making whisky, playing cards, and dancing).


I may not agree with you on the proper answer to the tangential question, but I think your contributions to the discussion are valid and useful.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

All that being said, I'm afraid I have helped to drive the thread off topic. Please accept my apologies, guys. It's all been quite civil. That's good. But I doubt anyone is likely to alter his opinions based on this tangential discussion, and we are certainly gone off the topic of 'building a mythic hero.' If anyone has further comments or questions about the tangent, I suggest we switch to PM mode.

-Ewan

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Your apologies are unnecessary; it was great fun.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

It is interesting how common "united the tribes" is. Obviously it took place in many real life conquerors, but those are often mythologized anyway.

That would apply to:

Cyrus the Great

Solon the Lawgiver

Temporarily to Attilla(he just died and the huns kind of faded).

Mohammad, most definitely.

Ghenghis Khan.

Bonnie Prince Charlie(subverted)

T.E. Lawrence.

Theodore Herzl(played with)

George Washington

Paul Atreides

Gandalf

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

The mythic pattern of a hero is that he marries his sister or niece? I don't wanna.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Sometimes he marries a fey. Actually that sounds kind of cool though it doesn't usually seem to work out.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

The bible is not a primary source. The bible we know today is an artifact of Egypt in the 3rd Century. Church tradition, and the writings of the Early Church Fathers, determined which books got accepted. For the most part, it was the Athanasian Canon.

Many of the ECFs were writing before the canon was established.

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

Right. If we should stick to the first NT canon that would be Marcion, right?

Re: Building a mythic hero
 

No. It would be whatever recitations were memorized by the clergy of the late 1st century church and the early 2nd century non-Gnostic church. Marcion, however, is the first to give a clear list of what he considered canon - his list, however, was what was used by him, and what he demanded his priests use, but he was pretty strongly leaning towards Gnosticicism, so his canon is quite suspect.

Note that, until the Synod of Trullo, no canon was formally approved by council.

Athanasius' Canon was important as it defined the Alexandrian Rite's canon - he was patriarch of a regional church. His was one of the first canons accepted as a regional definition... in 367... but was grounded upon a century old tradion within the Alexandrian region.