John:
>Glen, I would hardly call the world authority on comparative
>mythology, Joseph Campbell an "inane pseudotheory"!
Who said anything about Joseph Campbell?? I was refering to you and your
mentioning of Mayan and Sumerian myth in a single breath as something
connectable. They aren't - that's inane.
Connecting "mountain" versions of the world tree or Maori world-views may
also be a little inane. You may as well have included the Great Turtle too,
John. What stops your imagination? As another pointed out, the focus of this
discussion is not simply the telling of a tree but a collection of narrative
characteristics that always seem to coexist with this central tree,
recurring time and time again in a wide variety of cultures with astonishing
uniformity.
Let's talk about this Tree concept so that we don't get too confused like
John and try relating it to just about any culture with a tree tale:
The Tree, first of all, is associated with the creation of the world.
Second, the Tree is designed to seperate the watery underworld from the airy
sky and to provide a middle realm called earth where all humans live. Thus,
the Tree runs through all three realms (Sky/Earth/Water). Beings of all
kind, not just humans, supposedly live in this tree: gods, forest spirits,
nymphs, John, etc. Fourth, if we stop to pause for a moment how silly it is
to put gods and goddesses in trees, we might come to a revelation. It makes
more sense that _birds_ should live in trees. By superimposing three main
embodiments of the Goddess onto this Tree (serpent/bull/bird) which commonly
represent her in each of the three realms, everything makes more sense. This
is especially true in connection with myths (cf. Nyx) that see a bird (or
even a serpent!) creating the universe.
Now, if I was a bird and I was busy flying over primordial waters with
nowhere to land, I'd want to create a tree to perch on, wouldn't I? Of
course I would. Thus, it can only be the Bird (Goddess) that creates this
World Tree in the first place. After all this is explained away, I don't see
how Mayan myths have anything to do with this. Rather, I _do_ see the
likeliest origin of this particular World Tree tale.
In all, it seems more likely that it ultimately derived from Europe with the
Goddess, travelled through into Anatolia and on into the Near East while
also travelling directly eastward across the steppes and even on into North
America (Inuktituts and the Raven).
John, concerning the supposed direction of travel of these myths:
>Sumerian ---> Akkadian ---> West Semitic
Did Sumerians come to the Akkadians? The mountain didn't come to Mohammed
either. Of course I don't deny that the pre-existing Sumerian myths didn't
affect the Akkadian myth to some extent. The question is: What came from
what?
>Great Glen, except they flowed intio the Balkans from Anatolia
Who's they? Are we talking the flow of the mesolithic, flow of the
agriculture or the flow of Goddess figurines. If mesolithic, you would seem
to have confusingly shifted your idea from a European origin to now an
Anatolian one. If agriculture, you are most certainly confused since we are
speaking about a pre-agricultural era (Y'know, the origin of
Steppe/IndoTyrrhenian, remember?). If the latter (Goddess figurines), you
are fighting against evidence to your own embarassment. Please focus.
>Glen, that was what C-S waned to see with the genetic studies, was it
>trade, or did it mean a movement of people with their bodies (hence
>gene movements).
John, was what C-S "waned to see with the genetic studies", concerning a
pre- or post-agricultural time period? If the latter, we should avoid
speaking of C-S for periods prior to the neolithic since it would be a
deceptive tool of investigation. Obviously, any large influx of people
benefiting from agriculture would help to override much of the pre-existing
thinly populated genetics of Europe and Asia, thereby clouding the picture.
- gLeN
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com