Modern Mythology by Andrew Lang
page 59 of 218 (27%)
page 59 of 218 (27%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
longer intelligible to us,' by _analogies_; Mr. Max Muller interprets
them by _etymologies_. The difference is incalculable; not that Mannhardt always abstains from etymologising. Another Claim on Mannhardt While maintaining that 'all comparative mythology must rest on comparison of names as its most certain basis' (a system which Mannhardt declares explicitly to be so far 'a failure'), Mr. Max Muller says, 'It is well known that in his last, nay posthumous essay, Mannhardt, no mean authority, returned to the same conviction.' I do not know which is Mannhardt's very last essay, but I shall prove that in the posthumous essays Mannhardt threw cold water on the whole method of philological comparative mythology. However, as proof of Mannhardt's return to Mr. Max Muller's convictions, our author cites Mythologische Forschungen (pp. 86-113). What Mannhardt said In the passages here produced as proof of Mannhardt's conversion, he is not investigating a myth at all, or a name which occurs in mythology. He |
|