Peter Kirby

I have started this thread with two purposes:

A) To determine what constitutes a "different version" of a story.

B) To determine whether non-factual stories always have different versions.

Metacrock says: "Mythology tends to proliforate:multiple story versions are common."

Metacrock also says: "If a myth proliforates we would tend to find more versions of the same story, when there is only one version we can accept a degree of certainty that the story did not proliforate."

My questions are:

1. How many versions are there of the story of Odysseus?

2. How many versions are there of the story of Krishna?

3. How many versions are there of the story of William Tell?

4. How many versions are there of the story of Moses?

5. How many versions are there of the story of Aeneas?

6. How many versions are there of the story of Beowulf?

7. How many versions are there of the story of Gilgamesh?

I am not prejudicing the answer. Feel free to say whatever you think, along with a short explanation of what makes a different "version" of a story.

thanks,
Peter Kirby

Bede

Peter,

By version, I assume you mean independent versions rather than a whole load derived from a single point. I suppose this means we need to answer questions of independence too. For instance, these are vast amounts of stories on Odysseus but all are derived from one source - Homer. OTOH, William Tell appears in various chronicles and legends which may be independent or may be based on a single archetype (perhaps even the man himself). There are three Moses - J, P and D. Aeneas is found in a few Roman legends but all are eclipsed by Virgil. There is one Beowulf and two connected versions of Gilgamesh.

If Meta means that the origin of legends are harder to pin down, then I would agree with him. If he means that historical characters do not give rise to so many ficticous stories then I disagree - Jesus himself is a case in point as are all the apostles, Charlemagne, Alex the Great etc. I would suggest historical characters give rise to more legends than made up ones.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Clutch

Peter's question is an interesting exercise in literary criticism. But Bede's observations seem more useful: what, exactly, is the connection between the answer we give to the "How many versions?" question, and the historicity of the events depicted in some document(s)?

In the Christian case, once a gospel canon was established complete with dire threats and curses upon anyone who changed it, there was no wide proliferation of stories that were accepted as canonical. This somehow is supposed to reflect on the historicity of the stories? Surely not.

There is an old story told within Romany culture, that there were originally four nails for the crucifixion -- one intended to be driven through Jesus' heart. But a gypsy boy stole the fourth nail... and all gypsies have been given a divine mandate to exercise creativity in the interpretation of property laws ever since.

So, the gospel stories are true because this story has not been included in the canon? Again, surely not.

Peter Kirby

Does anyone else have answers to these questions? Metacrock, what do you think?

best,
Peter Kirby

Iasion

Greetings Peter,

Hmmm... challenging question...

"1. How many versions are there of the story of Odysseus? "

I suggest two versions,
original and later variant(s) :
1) original Homer (Odysseus is wise, no wooden horse)
2) later tales of Homeric Cycle (Odysseus wily and evil, wooden horse)
Its interesting that possibly the most famous episode of the story - the wooden horse - is a late addition, from Sack of Illium (and the Little Illiad with a slightly different version).


"2. How many versions are there of the story of Krishna? "
Pass.


"3. How many versions are there of the story of William Tell? "

Several.
All date from 180 years and more after the alleged events.
Earlier contemporary records describe events in detail with no mention of Tell.


"4. How many versions are there of the story of Moses? "

Several.
There are several variations in the Torah that involve Moses significant enough to count as different versions.
These variations probably spring from J E D P, so a fair answer may be up to 4 (not all 4 may differ on Moses specifically).
Plus probably the Koran (somewhat variant)
Plus possibly Manetho (somewhat variant)
Plus perhaps the Moses pseudoepigrapha?


"5. How many versions are there of the story of Aeneas? "

Probably two (or more),
1) Virgil
2) Livy
(contemporary to within a few years, some variations)
Earlier references (e.g. Homer) may count as another.


"6. How many versions are there of the story of Beowulf? "

Several.


"7. How many versions are there of the story of Gilgamesh? "

Several.
There is even an apocryphal letter from Gilgamesh to a local king demanding tribute to make an amulet for Enkidu that would weigh 30 pounds.


How many versions of the Jesus story?
Many.
The canonical count as 4 or maybe 2 if being generous to the synoptics.
There are several differing versions in the apocryphal Gospels and the Pistis Sophia, and P. Egerton 2.
There are the wild Jesus stories of the doketic "phantom" and the Gnostic version(s) of Valentinus and Marcus and Heracleon.
There is perhaps the Jesus of Hebrews which is rather variant.

Of all these figures, Jesus seem to have generated the most and widest variations.

Iasion

Peter Kirby

Metacrock, will you reply to the OP? It would be helpful to know what you think constitutes multiple versions of a story.

best,
Peter Kirby

Vorkosigan

If a myth proliforates we would tend to find more versions of the same story, when there is only one version we can accept a degree of certainty that the story did not proliforate."

...or, that the sources either did not survive, or were somehow controlled. I assume that anyone digging up Baghdad several hundred years ago will believe Hussein must have been a godlike person adored by his people. After all, all surviving evidence in Baghdad will attest to it....

malookiemaloo

I don't really think that there is much of a problem here. Different versions can all be true. It seems to me that the dirrerences in a true story can be accounted for by differences in emphases and also by what is sometimes left out. Also the purpose of the story is of paramount importance.

Take a soccer match. Your team wins , and you report the victory. The loosing side has had a man sent off unfairly. This is emphasised by the reporter of the loosing side. Both are true.

The gospel writers had different points to emphasise. Matthew Christs humanity, Mark His role as a servant, Luke His Kingship and John Christ's divinity.

They all be true but very different.

Good point though, Mr. Kirby.


m

Peter Kirby

I am not arguing that multiple versions of a story imply that a story has no truth to it. I am trying to evaluate the argument that a story that has no truth to it will be recorded in multiple versions. As part of that, I am trying to determine what it means exactly for a story to have 'multiple versions', particularly how Metacrock would define that because it is his argument.

best,
Peter Kirby

Celsus

Ok, I'll try and answer this one, but in the greater context of the Genesis creation myth (Gen 1-11). Firstly, Old Testament scholarship should shed an interesting light on mythic formation, particularly since the study of the Pentateuch is almost entirely about tracing forms, parallels and different sources. It should be noted that different styles do not necessitate different sources.

Blenkinsopp (1992:55) points out the Atrahasis myth (c.17th-16th century) as a basis for the mythic pattern found in Genesis:
Other themes in this context are:
a) Linking mythic history with real history
b) The ages of man (according to Golden, Silver, etc. and noble savages, etc.)
c) Progressive degeneration through history
d) New technology as part of this degeneration (e.g. notice how it is Cain's descendents who make the important discovery)

So what parallels do we find in history that follow the Atrahasis pattern? Blenkinsopp again points to the following:

1) The Babyloniaka of Berossus (a history of Babylon) from the Seleucid period, written for Antiochus I (indeed the whole of the Pentateuch falls within the same historiographic pattern).

2) Works and Days by Hesiod (8th century BCE)

3) The Gilgamesh Epic (probably earlier, but the source found is 7th century BCE), discovered at Nineveh.

4) The Noachian deluge (the dating for its sources spans from anywhere from the 9th century to the 4th century, although Blekinsopp gives good arguments that it should be understood within the context of a post-Exilic P strand, embossed with J narrative details).

Other than those listed by Blenkinsopp, we can see the extremely late and very sophisticated versions such as Ovid's Metamorphoses, passing mentions as in the Genesis Apocryphon (1QapGen), clear adaptations such as Genesis Commentary (4Q252) and Flood Apocryphon (4Q370), and fragmentary Sumerian versions c. 2000 BCE.

How do they compare? The most famous comparison is the Gilgamesh epic, compared against Genesis 6-9. From Boadt (1984:127) on the Noachian deluge:

1. Yahweh plans to destroy humankind because they are wicked
2. Yahweh warns Noah to build an ark and cover it with pitch*
3. Every species of animal is to be brought on the ark and his immediate family
4. The flood comes and destroys all life from the earth
5. The waters subside gradually and Noah sends out a raven and a dove
6. The ark comes to rest on the top of Mt. Ararat.
7. Noah builds an altar and sacrifices to Yahweh
8. Yahweh smells the sweet odor
9. Yahweh removes the curse from the earth and promises bounty and no more floods
10. Yahweh blesses Noah and his sons to repopulate the earth

And Gilgamesh:

1. The gods plan to destroy humans because they have gone astray
2. The god Ea warns Utnapishtim to build a boat and use pitch*
3. Every species of animal and of skilled craftsmen are to be saved, as well as his family.
4. The flood comes and destroys all life from earth
5. The waters subside slowly and Utnapishtim sends out a dove, swallow and raven
6. The boat comes to rest on the top of Mt. Nisir
7. Utnapishtim builds an altar and sacrifices to the gods
8. The gods smell the sweet odor
9. Enlil is reconciled with Utnapishtim and repents of his rash decision to destroy the earth
10. Enlil blesses Utnapishtim and his wife with immortality on the far western isles

* Hebrew is koper; Akkadian is kupru. Interestingly, both these words appear at the same place in both myths.

So the question is, does this lead us to derive some bedrock facts about the flood? I hope not. Where there are such overt similarities, Old Testament scholars are quite happy to consider the myths within a similar historiographic tradition. To answer the question of what constitutes a different "version," it's fairly straightforward for ANE flood myths, because there are different characters, locations, gods, etc. but all follow the thematic outline as we can see. Do the Gospels follow a similar thematic outline to the pagan mysteries? Are there differences between the two genres, and if so can we tell? Hopefully I've provided Iasion with plenty of fodder to consider.

Joel

Edited for references:

Blenkinsopp, J. (1992) The Pentateuch: An Introduction to the First Five Books of the Old Testament, Anchor Doubleday

Boadt, L. (1984) Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction, Paulist Press

Ovid, Metamorphoses, Book I

Vermes, G. (1995) The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 4th ed., Penguin Books