Myth, Ritual and Religion — Volume 1 by Andrew Lang
page 64 of 391 (16%)
page 64 of 391 (16%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
relations of myths, where we have to determine whether the myths of
peoples whose speech is of the same family are special modifications of a mythology once common to the race whence these peoples have sprung. The philological method alone can answer here." But this will seem a very limited province when we find that almost all races, however remote and unconnected in speech, have practically much the same myths. [1] Rev. de l'Hist. des Rel., xii. 3, 260, Nov., Dec., 1885. CHAPTER II. NEW SYSTEM PROPOSED. Chapter I. recapitulated--Proposal of a new method: Science of comparative or historical study of man--Anticipated in part by Eusebius, Fontenelle, De Brosses, Spencer (of C. C. C., Cambridge), and Mannhardt--Science of Tylor--Object of inquiry: to find condition of human intellect in which marvels of myth are parts of practical everyday belief--This is the savage state--Savages described--The wild element of myth a survival from the savage state--Advantages of this method--Partly accounts for wide DIFFUSION as well as ORIGIN of myths--Connected with general theory of evolution--Puzzling example of myth of the water- swallower--Professor Tiele's criticism of the method--Objections to method, and answer to these--See Appendix B. |
|