The Greek Myths

[peter]

Have just purchased the Penguin Deluxe Classics edition of this work by Robert Graves and have to say that I am mightily impressed with the level of scholarship that clearly went into it's writing. Graves gives precise renditions of each myth, including the varients thereof and the sources from which they are derived. He then gives what I believe to be his own interpretation of the historical events for which the myth might be seen as allegorical. The result is that rather than just having the myths thrown at you one after another, you are given a break in which to absorb the story, think about it and learn a bit of history to boot.
One thing upon which I am slightly perplexed is Graves interpretation of the myths in terms of his belief that early pre-hellenic Greece was matriarchal and matrilinear in terms of it's sovereignty - a refection of the often hierarchical superiority of female deity's in terms of their worship by the people. Graves see's kingship as a relative late comer in the mythological framework and his interpretations tend to reflect this. He countered criticism of his approach with the slightly condescending observation that most classically trained scholars did not have the poetic and literary background that he was able to bring to the table, and thus could not be expected to be able to see the deeper allegories and nuances of meaning hidden within the myths.

My question is, to what extent is Graves analysis of the myths given academic credence today, and is there any historical evidence to support his matrilinear thesis by classics scholars of the present day. (I have to confess a bias here - I really like the idea that the myths are a vehicle by which knowledge of deep historical events are carried into the present via the oral tradition and find it much more satisfying than the Jungian approach of viewing them as simple (inverted commas here perhaps) upwellings from the subconscious made manifest in the form of vocalised tale-telling.)

[aliantha]

I had to check the dates. Graves wrote The Greek Myths in the mid-1950s, at about the same time as an archeologist named Marija Gimbutas was positing that early European civilizations were matrilineal until patriarchal cultures migrated into the region during the Bronze Age.

Gimbutas's views were adopted by several influential Neopagan thinkers (which is how I know about it ) but mainstream archaeology didn't ever buy into them. Her supporters say at least some of the resistance is due to sexism. It's hard for some men to give up on the idea that their sex may not always have been in charge.

Graves must have believed her, though; he wrote a book called The White Goddess that claims the Ogham alphabet is proof of an ancient belief in a pan-European Great Goddess. Or something like that. I got about halfway through it, realized I had no idea what he was talking about, and bailed.

[Avatar]

Never heard of him. Or the pre-Hellenic matriarchy thing. I have no opinion. Although, as I kid, I did love to read Greek, Roman and Egyptian mythology.

--A

[peter]

It's an ongoing thing with me that I begin to read a book, start to enjoy it.....and then begin to worry that the information (or more often the interpretation) therein may be erroneous. That thesis you mention Ali, certainly seems to be in line with the brief explanation that Graves gives in his intro. I certainly recommend giving his 'Greek Myths' a go Av, if the subject still interests you - the clarity he brings to what is often a confused jumble of conflicting accounts is refreshing, even if his analysis must be kept at (main-stream) arms length.

[Avatar]

Must say I never really bothered with any analysis of them...just liked the stories. Egyptian mythology was my real favourite. Note the stylised Eye of Horus that is my avatar. (And which I also have tattooed on myself. )

--A

[aliantha]

I might have to pick up Graves' version of the Greek myths. I never really got into them, other than what I read in school; I've found the Celtic myths more interesting. And the Slavs, though it's harder to find stuff on Western Slavs; Russian and Ukrainian gods are a bit different than those in, say, Poland and the Czech lands.

It's fun to read a bunch of different mythologies and see how the ideas moved across the land masses and were subsumed into other belief systems. A lot of that sort of borrowing/adoption/outright theft occurred in the Middle East, of course.

You've hit on one of my bits of geekery, peter. Think on that, and be dismayed...

[peter]

On the contrary Ali - I'm delighted to have someone whose brain to pick when my understanding falls short. This is geekery of which I approve whole-heartedly!

Graves does indeed, in his short commentaries, draw attention to paralells with the mythologies of other cultures from Indian through to Norse and Scandinavian.

Av - have you ever seen a breakdown of what the various parts of the Eye of Horus signify? I can't remember what they are, but do remember that it's quite an interesting and involved symbol.

[Avatar]

Indeed, as I recall, the image is divided into 6 parts, each of which represents a specific sense.

--A

[peter]

Yes: I wiki'd it after posting and the entry gives the mathematical relationship between the parts, but not the meanings of each. Must check that out again.

[aliantha]

Always happy to provide whatever misinformation I can, peter.

[Iolanthe]

I also have two very thumbed paperbacks of Graves's Greek Myths downstairs. I have to admit that lately their only use has been to help hubby do his crossword on a Sunday morning. Must get them off the shelf and read them again sometime.

[peter]

Look forward to picking two very astute ladies brains as I move forward through the book.

[Avatar]

Yes: I wiki'd it after posting and the entry gives the mathematical relationship between the parts, but not the meanings of each. Must check that out again.

Found this: www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/eye.html

--A