Originally Posted by Dave31

Ah, Acharya has responded to the Skeptic magazine article by Tim Callahan (Eskeptic, 2/25/09)

Skeptic Mangles ZEITGEIST
(and Religious History)
http://stellarhousepublishing.com/sk...zeitgeist.html

She mops the floor with him.

Originally Posted by Murdock

This latter point about the wise men/kings would be important only to a pedant but not to the public,...

Originally Posted by Robert M. Schock, Ph.D

The great pyramids of Egypt provide a wonderful glimpse of the artistry, skill and imagination of the ancient world. But pyramids can be found in India, China, Peru, Bolivia, Mexico and Ireland. In this provocative book, geologist Schoch (noted for his work in redating the Sphinx, which was recounted in his Voices of the Rocks) wonders how so many diverse cultures built such similar structures with similar purposes. .

Originally Posted by Dictionary of the History of Ideas

MAX MÜLLER AND THE NATURE-MYTHOLOGY

The wide interest in Indo-European mythologies, religions, and folklore which characterizes the second half of the nineteenth century is in great measure an outgrowth of Max Müller's literary activity. From the brilliant essay on “Comparative Mythology,” published in Oxford Essays (1856) to his two-volume work, Contributions to the Science of Mythology (1897), the learned Vedic scholar untiringly explained, defended, and restated his conception of the origin, meaning, and function of myths. According to Müller, mythology is the result of a “disease of language.” The fact that an object can have many names (polynomy) and, conversely, that the same name can be applied to several objects (homonymy) produced a confusion of names. This gave rise to the combination of several gods into one and the separation of one god into many. Nomina-numina: what was at the beginning a name, nomen, became a divinity, numen. Moreover, the use of endings denoting grammatical gender led to the personification of the gods.

According to Müller, the ancient Aryans constructed their pantheon around the sun, the dawn, and the sky. The solar myths played the foremost role. “I look upon the sunrise and sunset, on the daily return of day and night, on battle between light and darkness, on the whole solar drama in all its details that is acted every day, every month, every year, in heaven and in earth, as the principle subject of early mythology” (1869, p.537). Therefore, Cronus swallowing and later disgorging his children is only the “mythopoeic” expression of a meterological phenomenon—namely, the sky devouring and later releasing the clouds. Likewise, the Baltic tales with the golden boat that sinks in the sea, or the apple that falls from the tree, actually refer to the setting sun.

Müller also found that the solar myths among the non-Aryan races are the result of the “disease of language.” The myths of the Polynesian hero Maui reveal their meaning when we discover that this name signifies the sun, or fire, of the day; the Hottentot god Tsui-goab, now understood as “Broken-knee,” originally meant “the dawn” or “rising sun” (Dorson in Sebeok, p. 26).

In his old age, Max Müller witnessed the collapse of the solar-mythology. The discrediting of this once popular method of interpretation was partially due to the devastating criticism of Andrew Lang, but also was due to the consequence of the wild exaggerations of some of Müller's disciples. Thus George William Cox reduced all Indo-European mythologies and folklores to the contest between light and darkness. While Müller endeavored to establish the identity of certain Greek and Indian gods through etymology, Cox compared the epic elements present in the different myths. As a result, all the Greek heroes, from Heracles and Achilles to Odysseus and Paris, and even King Arthur, the Frog Prince, and Cinderella, revealed themselves to be impersonators of the same solar deity. “The story of the sun starting in weakness and ending in victory, waging a long warfare against darkness, clouds, and storms, and scattering them all in the end is the story of all patient self-sacrifice, of all Christian devotion”
(Cox, I, 168).

Originally Posted by Dictionary of the History of Ideas

THE ASTRAL-MYTHOLOGICAL AND PAN-BABYLONIAN SCHOOLS

At the beginning of this century the so-called astral-mythological and Pan-Babylonian schools became popular in Germany. Although originally representing two independent approaches, their basic presuppositions were similar, and in 1906 the partisans of both schools founded the Gesellschaft für vergleichende Mythenforschung (Society for the Study of Comparative Mythology) in Berlin. The first volume published by the society was E. Siecke's Drachenkämpfe: Untersuchungen zur indogermanischen Sagenkunde (1907). This passionate and prolific author can be considered the founder and the leader of the new school of thought. For Siecke, myths must be understood literally because their contents always refer to some specific celestial phenomena, namely, the forms and movements of the planets and stars. Consequently, for Siecke myths do not reflect animistic experiences and conceptions; they have nothing to do with belief in souls, or with dreams and nightmares. The most important mythical figures are the sun and especially the moon. As a matter of fact, Siecke, Böcklen, and Hüsing emphasized so strongly the role of the moon in the mythical process that their doctrine could be called “pan-lunarism” (Schmidt, Origin..., p. 94).

One of the most distinguished followers of the astral-mythology school, P. Ehrenreich, reacted against these excesses. In his book Die allgemeine Mythologie und ihre ethnologischen Grundlagen (1910), he pointed out the importance of the sun and other heavenly bodies in the mythologies of a considerable number of primitive and archaic peoples. In the last analysis the study of moon-myths revealed that early man was relating astral phenomena to the mystery of death and resurrection. The dying moon became an image of the mythical ancestor, and the lunar rhythms were considered as somehow being the paradigm of human existence (birth, growth, death, resurrection).

Pan-Babylonianism was represented principally by H. Winckler, A. Jeremias, and E. Stucken. Despite their copious productivity, very little of their work has retained any lasting significance. In his three-volume work Astralmythen (1901-07), Stucken tried to prove the direct or indirect Mesopotamian origin of all the mythologies of the world. For the Pan-Babylonianists, all myths are concerned with the movements of the sun, the moon, and the planet Venus. Celestial revolutions were regarded by the Mesopotamians as the expression of the power, will, and intelligence of the deities. As early as 3000 B.C. this system was completely developed in Mesopotamia, whence it was then diffused over the whole earth, being found even today in the myths of the “primitives.” The Pan-Babylonianists saw evidence of this diffusion in the astronomical knowledge implied in mythological systems. Such scientific observations, they argued, were certainly impossible for the archaic peoples. Thus the Pan-Babylonianists link the naturistic origin of myths with their historical diffusion. Against the supporters of animism and of the theory of “elementary ideas” of Bastian who explained the similarity of myths by the basic unity of the human mind, the Pan-Babylonianists emphasized the highly elevated, “scientific” origin of mythology, and its diffusion even among the most primitive tribes.

The Pan-Babylonian school declined as a consequence of its own extravagant generalizations and excesses. It was easy to prove, for example, that the primitive myths concerning the Pleiades have nothing to do with the passage of the sun through the zodiac (Schmidt, Origin..., pp. 101ff.). But some of the Pan-Babylonianists' presuppositions were reasserted by other schools—although in different contexts. For instance, a quarter of a century later, “diffusionism” became extremely popular in England under the influence of G. Elliot Smith's Pan-Egyptianism. This Pan-Egyptianist school tried to explain the totality of myths, rituals, and social institutions (with the exceptions of those of the hunters and food-gatherers) as ultimately deriving from Egypt. The British Myth and Ritual School also conceded an exceptional place to the Babylonian documents.