Petrarchive – the mystery of Greek mythology

back
No.9862 Anonymous>>9873 >>9898
the mystery of Greek mythology
Post image
Since I've been trying to start reading Philosophy more frequently, I'm starting Mythology by Edith Hamilton. So far she makes a good point as to why Greek mythology is so timeless compared to earlier myths. However, it still begs the question of how and why the Greeks chose a more anthropocentric version of mythology rather than copy the tales of monsters and half-human creatures that were common in Mesopotamia and Egypt.

I guess you could make the case that since the environment in the poleis of Mycenaean Greece were relatively stable and safe compared to Mesopotamia and Egypt, the Greeks didn't have existential anxieties that represented themselves as big bad monsters who came down from the heavens and destroyed your life. Maybe relying on a big angry river for your sustenance forced you to see the Gods as cruel and merciless? I know this applies to Mesopotamia but I don't know if it does to Egypt.

I do think, however, that this "environmentally determinist" view might have some basis in other cases. For example, the Iliad, having been written near the Dark Ages, is mostly based on individual heroes and the personal grudges that drive them to war. The same tete-a-tete conflicts between different chiefs was also really common during that same age, unlike the more centralized conflicts between poleis earlier on. And if you were to look at the Mesopotamians & the Epic of Gilgamesh, they modeled their underworld based on their own world, where everything turns to mud. It's hard to pin down just how much of each civ's respective mythology is based on the real world

Anyway, I haven't read much into it and I have an amateur's understanding of ancient history so if anyone else has a favorite pet theory I'd be interested in hearing it.
No.9870 Anonymous>>9871
Post image
>Maybe relying on a big angry river for your sustenance forced you to see the Gods as cruel and merciless? I know this applies to Mesopotamia but I don't know if it does to Egypt.
I guess that it would. Egyptians gods look all nice but are pretty hardcore.
>if anyone else has a favorite pet theory
The more I read about mythology, the more I feel like I am reading the same story. I can't tell if it's attributable to humanity's universality or humanity's lack or originality. I could also be reading wrong.
No.9871 Anonymous>>9874 >>9889
Post image
>>9870
>The more I read about mythology, the more I feel like I am reading the same story. I can't tell if it's attributable to humanity's universality or humanity's lack or originality. I could also be reading wrong.
Because it is, with just different flavors.
Look, there are levels to this. Esoteric/exoteric interpretations. But at the end of the day many of the stories are intended for children with a literal exoteric interpretation who then get initiated into the metaphors and esoteric interpretations later in life. With all that being said, humans are generally pretty similar (need water, food, women, safety) so the myths are various blends of this.

You would do well reading this thread on paganism. I made some post there (>>9658 and >>9754)
No.9873 Anonymous
>>9862 (OP)
>the Greeks didn't have existential anxieties that represented themselves as big bad monsters who came down from the heavens and destroyed your life
LOL. Do you look at the primary source?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMAokrzLuy8
No.9874 Anonymous>>9875
Post image
>>9871
>humans are generally pretty similar (need water, food, women, safety)
No.9875 Anonymous>>9876
>>9874
Every human needs to drink water, eat, breathes oxygen, no?
Tell me one that doesn't.
No.9876 Anonymous>>9877
>>9875
Either you see it or you don't, but that choice of words is telling.
No.9877 Anonymous>>9878
>>9876
I get your redditism and pedantic antics. Let's split hairs and miss the point completely
No.9878 Anonymous>>9879
>>9877
You have no business lecturing anon when you can't even define humanity properly.
No.9879 Anonymous
>>9878
>now this is about defining humanity
what are you bored and lonely. that's not the topic nor the point
plebbit loves the conversations, i'm bored of them
No.9889 Anonymous>>9892
>>9871
>humans are generally pretty similar (need water, food, women, safety)

What an utter curse being female is
No.9892 Anonymous
>>9889
You are the definition of 'Missing the forest for the trees'
No.9898 Anonymous>>9908
>>9862 (OP)
>reading Philosophy more frequently, I'm starting Mythology by Edith Hamilton
This isn't philosophy.
No.9908 Anonymous>>9912 >>9938
Post image
>>9898
I'm familiarizing with Greek mythology before starting to read Greek philosophy. Why is everyone being so pedantic? lol
No.9912 Anonymous>>9913
>>9908
>Why is everyone being so pedantic? lol
You should be able to discern the redditors here.
I also found a good summary for you here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ8fPflZOYg
It nicely outlines many of the grey areas within early greek religion.
No.9913 Anonymous
Post image
>>9912
thank you! am currently bedridden so this is perfect timing
No.9938 Anonymous
>>9908
I think you're doing it exactly right. Remember to rely on Heraclitus as a transitional thinker between the myths and the philosophy.

You can see when you study someone like Proclus that the whole upshot of most Greek thinkers concerns their understanding of the pantheonv. For Proclus, and for his system of conceptual participation, you have to treat Zeus as one who mediates between generativity and will. This goes alongside a theurgic treatment of the Pantheon. For others, like the Pythagoreans, Apollo must be the harmonizer -- and so he must be approached in an ecstatic fashion, as the Pythian Apollo at Delphi. And so on.