Suppose, for example, Endymion and Selene, metaphorically named (one compared to the rolling sun, the other - compared to the moon), lost his human individuality, melt fat in the images of the moon and sun thanks to the false understanding of metaphors. What happens then? The legend of their love mixed with the appearance and movements of two heavenly bodies; these actions start be interpreted as the results of known feelings and desires; that that way, when the sun will begin to lean to the West, and the moon, swim on the mid-palate will become to follow him, this fact begins to explain this follows: "Selena loves and pursues Endymion". Therefore, we get a thorough explanation of the myth without distorting it and not recommending it contains a superfluous fiction. We can accept the biographical part of it, if not as literal fact, then, in any case, as a fact in his home basis. It becomes easier for us to understand how the inevitable about the interpretation arose from a more or less faithful to the legends these strange he is identified actors with objects and forces, does not reminiscent of the human image. Then we learn how from the attempts to reconcile in my mind the contradictory elements of the myth originated in the habit to attribute the actions of these nonhuman objects of human intentions. Further confirmation of the hypothesis can be found in the facts that prevent the assumption of the hypothesis the opposite. These items and powers, celestial and terrestrial, which themselves attract the most human attention, are among the his many proper names, some are identical with different names individuals born in different places and had a number of different adventure. So, the sun is known to us under a variety of names of Apollo, Of Endymion, Helios, Typhon, etc; these are all persons having incompatible pedigrees. Such anomalies prof Max Muller explains, apparently the inaccuracy of legend, who "paid little attention to the contradictions or ready to solve them sometimes the most violent measures" (Chips., vol. ii, p. 84).
1 comment:
Suppose, for example, Endymion and Selene, metaphorically named (one
compared to the rolling sun, the other - compared to the moon), lost
his human individuality, melt fat in the images of the moon and sun
thanks to the false understanding of metaphors. What happens then? The legend of their love
mixed with the appearance and movements of two heavenly bodies; these actions
start be interpreted as the results of known feelings and desires; that
that way, when the sun will begin to lean to the West, and the moon, swim on
the mid-palate will become to follow him, this fact begins to explain this
follows: "Selena loves and pursues Endymion". Therefore, we get
a thorough explanation of the myth without distorting it and not recommending it
contains a superfluous fiction. We can accept the biographical part of it,
if not as literal fact, then, in any case, as a fact in his home
basis. It becomes easier for us to understand how the inevitable about
the interpretation arose from a more or less faithful to the legends these strange
he is identified actors with objects and forces, does not
reminiscent of the human image. Then we learn how from the attempts
to reconcile in my mind the contradictory elements of the myth originated in the habit
to attribute the actions of these nonhuman objects of human intentions.
Further confirmation of the hypothesis can be found in the facts that prevent
the assumption of the hypothesis the opposite. These items and powers, celestial and terrestrial,
which themselves attract the most human attention, are among the
his many proper names, some are identical with different names
individuals born in different places and had a number of different
adventure. So, the sun is known to us under a variety of names of Apollo,
Of Endymion, Helios, Typhon, etc; these are all persons having incompatible
pedigrees. Such anomalies prof Max Muller explains, apparently
the inaccuracy of legend, who "paid little attention to the contradictions
or ready to solve them sometimes the most violent measures" (Chips., vol.
ii, p. 84).
Post a Comment