Author: Ted Holden The following series of articles was posted to t.o by the Efemeral Rese
======================================================================
Author: Ted Holden
======================================================================
The following series of articles was posted to t.o by
the Efemeral Research Foundation. I have retained it and
simply include it in any large collection of catastrophist
literature. I do not see any copyright signs in it, and assume
that they, as I, simply wish this material to reach as wide an audience
as possible.
.................................................................
.................................................................
VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--Introduction
It was Immanuel Velikovsky's claim in "Worlds in Collision"
that the spectacle of VENUS AS A COMET-LIKE BODY MARAUDING
ABOUT THE HEAVENS was once witnessed by ancient cultures all
around the globe.
The next 4 postings (VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--One, Two, Three, Fnotes)
comprise an article recently published in AEON, a Journal of
Myth and Science.
The article shows that the EVIDENCE in favour of Venus' comet-
like past is far more pervasive than Velikovsky ever imagined.
It was Velikovsky's thesis that many ancient myths commemorate
spectacular cataclysms associated with the various planets.
Ev Cochrane shows strong support for this radical view--evidence
from the mythology and astronomy of both the Old World and the
New World.
In Ev Cochrane's words:
"A Golden Age at the dawn of time was recalled as the well-
spring of civilization and deemed to be the gift of Saturn
for the simple reason that spectacular events associated with
the period of that planet's dominance provided the
"divine" inspiration for the origin and development of cities,
laws, religious rites, systems of writing, etc."
"Our entire conception of the recent history of the
solar system--not to mention celestial mechanics and a host
of other sciences--is fated to be turned upside down."
The title of the article is:
TOWARDS A SCIENCE OF MYTHOLOGY: VELIKOVSKY'S CONTRIBUTION
The author is: Ev Cochrane
The article was originally published in November 1992 in:
*** AEON--A Symposium on Myth and Science *** Vol.III, No.1.
Available from 2326 Knapp, AMES, IOWA, 50010, USA
(subscription: $US40).
The electronic version of the article was prepared by:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* === Efemeral Research Foundation *
* // | \\ Exploring the Saturn Myth *
* // | \\ *
* ||-----o-----|| *
* \\ | // Internet: abeggs@peg.apc.org *
* //\ \..|../ / *
* || `../.\..' AARNet/ACSNet: abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au *
* `='' / \ *
* / \ APC Networks: peg.abeggs *
* / \ *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
From abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au Mon Jan 11 15:02:00 1993
VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--One
[this and 3 other postings comprise an article from
***AEON--A Symposium on Myth and Science***,
Vol. III, No. 1, November, 1992]
*******************************
TOWARDS A SCIENCE OF MYTHOLOGY: VELIKOVSKY'S CONTRIBUTION
By: Ev Cochrane
When all is said and done it may well turn out that Velikovsky's
most enduring claim to fame will be his singular contribution to
comparative mythology; specifically, the thesis that many
ancient myths commemorate spectacular cataclysms associated with
the various planets. This is truly an original thesis, with
little if any precedent in the writings of previous
scholars.[Fn.1]
As is the case with any truly seminal work, "Worlds in Collision"
raises as many questions as it answers. Indeed, questions
inspired by Velikovsky's work have since launched hundreds of
studies, more than one of which portends a revolution in our
understanding of ancient mythology. Why is it that the planet
Saturn was reckoned the first king by peoples around the world,
and why is it that the Golden Age associated with that planet-
king is recalled with nostalgic veneration? Why was that same
planet called by the name of the Sun? Such questions formed the
backdrop of David Talbott's "The Saturn Myth," itself a landmark
contribution to comparative mythology.[Fn.2]
One could propose equally provocative questions about the other
planets. Why is it that the planet Mars was represented as a
warrior equipped with sword and/or club by peoples the world
over? Why was the red planet consistently associated with images
of the World Pillar, the latter object being envisaged as the
upholder of the ancient heavens?[Fn.3]
Why were the greatest of ancient goddesses--Inanna, Ishtar,
Astarte, Isis, Anat, Aphrodite, etc.--invoked by the epithet
Queen of Heaven and specifically identified with the planet
Venus?[Fn.4] Why were those same goddesses associated with a
destructive epiphany said to have threatened the very
foundations of heaven and earth?[Fn.5] Only Velikovsky, among
the hundreds of scholars who have explored these traditions,
dared to ask the question: Is it possible to explain the myth of
the goddess from the behaviour of the planet?
Close upon the heels of each of these questions follows a host
of others, equally inexplicable from the conventional
perspective which imagines the planets to have varied little in
their orbits and appearances over the course of the past billion
years.
A YOUTHFUL SCIENCE
Before proceeding to our discussion of Velikovsky's particular
theory it may prove illuminating to view it from the perspective
provided by the history in the field. The scientific roots of
comparative mythology can be traced back to the 17th century,
when the likes of Samuel Bochart, Bernard de Fontanelle, and Sir
William Jones were composing their works.[Fn.6] These scholars
documented the striking similarities which exist amongst the
mythologies of the world's various cultures. It was in the
latter part of the nineteenth century, however, that real
progress was made towards developing a science of mythology,
with numerous attempts being made to reduce the phantasmagoria
of the world's mythology to a common denominator, frequently a
nature-allegory of some sort.[Fn.7] Famous examples include
Muller's sun-god, Kuhn's storm-god, and Mannhardt's fertility-
daemon.
In the twentieth century these ideas fell out of fashion, to be
replaced by the grand interpretations of myth inspired by such
figures as Frazer and Freud. Frazer, like other prominent
members of what came to be known as the Cambridge school
(Harrison, Cook, Murray, Cornford), sought to explain the
content of myth by reference to archaic ritual. According to
this view, myth was to be interpreted as the spoken or written
correlate of things done in ritual. The myth of Osiris' death
and dismemberment, for example, was interpreted as providing the
rationale for an Egyptian harvest-ritual commemorating the
annual death of the vegetation-spirit.[Fn8.]
Although Freud wrote little on myth himself--"Moses and
Monotheism" being perhaps his deepest foray into the area--his
psychoanalytic writings had a profound influence upon the ideas
of other scholars such as Jung, Roheim, and Rank, each of whom
devoted extensive works to uncovering the psychological
determinants of myth. The writings of Jung and Rank, in turn,
exerted a formative influence upon subsequent scholars such as
Campbell and Kerenyi, whose works have done a great deal to
bring the subject of mythology to the forefront of public
consciousness.
Alas, the schemes of Frazer and Freud were fated to be replaced
as well, and in recent years the theories associated with the
names of Dumezil, Levi-Strauss, and Eliade have dominated the
scene of comparative mythology. The first two scholars were
heavily influenced by the pioneering efforts of the sociologist
Durkheim, who sought to establish a correlation between the
central themes of myth and underlying cultural patterns.[Fn.9]
Dumezil, for example, looked to the tripartite structure of
ancient Indo-European society for the origin of particular
patterns of myth. According to this view, the behaviour and
functions of the warrior-class that distinguished ancient Indo-
European societies accounts for the fascinating mythology
associated with heroes of the warrior-type (Heracles, Indra,
Cuchulainn, etc.).[Fn.10]
Levi-Strauss, on the other hand, looked to the structure and
function of the human brain to explain the origin of societal
patterns together with their attendant mythological
motives.[Fn.11] The myth of Oedipus, according to this view,
owes little to forbidden psychological urges. Rather it reflects
the universal tendency of human beings to think in terms of
binary operations, such as black/white, good/evil, heaven/hell,
etc., the function of myth being to provide a logical form of
mediation between apparent or real contradictions.[Fn.12]
Viewed from this brief historical perspective, Velikovsky's
thesis can be seen as forming a logical variation upon the
nature-allegory school of comparative mythology. Like that
school, and in stark contrast to that which grew up around the
ideas of Levi-Strauss, Velikovsky sought to provide an objective
historical basis for the central themes of ancient myth, the
principal difference being that he substitutes the planets for
the sun (or some other meteorological phenomenon) as the primary
referent of myth.
ON PLANETS AND MYTH
Historically, the planets have been virtually ignored by
comparative mythologists. A notable exception to this statement
is the monumental treatise by Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha
von Dechend--"Hamlet's Mill." Originally published in 1969, and
promoted by the authors as a "first reconnaissance of a realm
well-nigh unexplored and uncharted," Hamlet's Mill documented
the surprising prominence of the planets in ancient myths the
world over:
>The real actors on the stage of the universe are very few, if
>their adventures are many. The most "ancient treasure"--in
>Aristotle's word--that was left to us by our predecessors of the
>High and Far-Off Times was the idea that the gods are really
>stars, and that there are no other actors. The forces reside in
>the starry heavens, and all the stories, characters and
>adventures narrated by mythology concentrate on the active
>powers among the stars, who are the planets.[Fn.13]
Hamlet's Mill warrants mention here not only because it
represents a significant contribution to scholarship, but
because it provides compelling evidence in support of more than
one of Velikovsky's controversial theses; this despite the fact
that the authors arrived at their conclusions independently of
Velikovsky and would no doubt be horrified at the prospect of
seeing their researches mentioned in the same breath as those of
the author of "Worlds in Collision." Regarding the planet Saturn,
for example, de Santillana and von Dechend found that it figured
prominently in myths of World-ending cataclysm, Phaethon's fall
and the Deluge being among them. This finding recalls
Velikovsky's understanding of Saturn's recent history--deduced
from ancient myth--whereby it experienced a nova-like flare-up
and inundated the surrounding cosmos with fire and flood.[Fn.14]
Unlike Velikovsky, however, de Santillana and von Dechend were
hamstrung by a conservative approach to astrophysics and this,
in my opinion, prevented them from entertaining the possibility
that ancient myths recounting cataclysms involving the
respective planets were indeed based upon cataclysmic events.
Confronted with Plato's clear statement that Phaethon's fateful
ride had reference to a great cataclysm caused by a deviation
amongst the heavenly bodies, de Santillana and von Dechend
nevertheless object: "The Pythagoreans were neither idle
storytellers, not were they even mildly interested in unusual
sensational `catastrophes' caused by meteors, and the
like."[Fn.15] Here the authors of Hamlet's Mill failed to heed
their own advice: "The only thing to do is proceed inductively,
step by step, avoiding preconceptions and letting the argument
lead toward its own conclusions."[Fn16]
Upon discovering the intimate association of Saturn with the
Pole, de Santillana and von Dechend failed to ask the obvious
question whether Saturn has always travelled on its present
orbit? And when confronted with unequivocal testimony from the
Gilgamesh Epic that the ancient sun-god rose and set over the
same mountain (confirmed by traditions throughout the ancient
world), de Santillana and von Dechend once again turned a deaf
ear: "The sun is not in the habit of rising on the same spot
every day, and it needs no profound astronomical knowledge to
become aware of this fact."[Fn.17]
How, then, did the authors of Hamlet's Mill explain their
findings? Here the authors credited the ancients with a
sophisticated understanding of astronomical principles,
particularly so the precession of the equinoxes, supposedly
discovered by Hipparchus in 127 BCE, but according to de
Santillana and von Dechend, already well-known in the Near East
several millenia earlier.[Fn.18] It was the diffusion of this
ancient "science" (by whom or by what means is not explained)
which accounts for the presence of identical mythical motives
around the globe.[Fn.19] Not surprisingly, this hypothesis has
failed to find favour among historians of science, nor, for that
matter, has Hamlet's Mill had any discernible impact upon
subsequent studies of ancient myth.[Fn.20]
ARCHAEOASTRONOMY
In recent years interest in traditions surrounding the planets
has surged due to the emergence of archaeoastronomy and
ethnoastronomy as serious fields of research.[Fn.21] Scholars in
these respective fields comb the architectural structures,
sacred writings, and iconography of ancient cultures in both the
New World and Old for some reference to celestial goings-on.
Here, too, more than one of these researchers has stumbled
across evidence supportive of Velikovsky's general thesis of
planetary catastrophism, although the far-reaching ramifications
of such discordant data are typically (mis)interpreted in a more
conventional manner. For example, one leading scholar--Anthony
Aveni--has called attention to the remarkable "coincidence" that
both Maya and Babylonian astronomers credited Venus with a 90
day period of invisibility at superior conjunction despite the
fact the true period is closer to 50 days.[Fn.22] How this could
be Aveni offers nary a clue.
Thus there are clear signs that planets will soon be receiving
their just due as objective referents of ancient myth. Most
significant, perhaps, is the fact that even in the works of such
scholars as Levi-Strauss--whose interpretation of myth is
diametrically opposed to that of Velikovsky--there can be found
concessions that planetary bodies formed a prominent factor in
the origin of ancient myths: "Max Muller and his school must be
given credit for having discovered, and to some extent
deciphered, the astronomical code so often used by the
myths."[Fn.23]
********************************
See the postings ***VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--Two, Three, Fnotes***
for the rest of this article.
********************************
This electronic version of the article was prepared by:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* === Efemeral Research Foundation *
* // | \\ Exploring the Saturn Myth *
* // | \\ *
* ||-----o-----|| *
* \\ | // Internet: abeggs@peg.apc.org *
* //\ \..|../ / *
* || `../.\..' AARNet/ACSNet: abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au *
* `='' / \ *
* / \ APC Networks: peg.abeggs *
* / \ *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
From abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au Mon Jan 11 15:04:00 1993
VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--Two
[this and 3 other postings comprise an article from
***AEON--A Symposium on Myth and Science***,
Vol. III, No. 1, November, 1992]
*******************************
TOWARDS A SCIENCE OF MYTHOLOGY: VELIKOVSKY'S CONTRIBUTION
By: Ev Cochrane
*******************************
VELIKOVSKY AND ATHENA
If, then, Velikovsky's primary contribution to a science of
comparative mythology is the emphasis upon planets, the question
arises as to the evidentiary basis of this claim and its
ramifications for a science of mythology? Here we will briefly
discuss Velikovsky's analysis of the myth of Athena--arguably
the best example of his method.
If one were to judge solely by its prominence in Worlds in
Collision, one would have to acknowledge that the myth of
Athena's birth forms the cornerstone of Velikovsky's approach to
ancient mythology. That said, it is puzzling to find that there
has been virtually no discussion of this myth or of the
theoretical methodology which inspired Velikovsky's thesis of
the recent birth of the planet Venus, one of the most
sensational and heavily discussed claims of Worlds in Collision.
Inasmuch as Velikovsky offered a revolution in our understanding
of ancient mythology--indeed of ancient history in general--one
would have thought that a close scrutiny of his initial premises
would have been in order to see whether such a revolution was
truly in order. Rather than a close scrutiny, however,
Velikovsky's thesis has generally met with unquestioning
acceptance amongst his followers, and with almost complete
silence by his critics.[Fn.24]
The mythology of Athena, Velikovsky maintained, commemorated
spectacular events involving the planet Venus--or, to be more
specific, the protoplanet Venus whilst undergoing a comet-like
phase. And, in fact, the oldest extant account of Athena's
epiphany as a war-goddess, that found in the Iliad, presents the
goddess as a comet-like body shooting across the heavens: "Like
a blazing star which the lord of heaven shoots forth, bright and
scattering sparks all around, to be a portent for sailors or for
some great army of men, so Pallas Athena shot down to earth and
leapt into the throng."[Fn.25]
This passage, of course, has long been the subject of scholarly
debate and was duly emphasized by Velikovsky. Unbeknownst to
Velikovsky, however, was the fact that other traditions
surrounding Athena present a similar picture of the
goddess.[Fn.26] Athena's intimate association with the Palladium
(Palladium is the diminutive of Pallas), for example, has long
drawn the attention of scholars, the latter object being
described as a meteor-like object which fell (or was thrown)
from heaven.[Fn.27] This tradition brings to mind Athena's
intimate relation to (and probable identification with) Zeus'
thunderbolt--the latter object being described as a fiery,
serpentine-formed body thrown from heaven. Such traditions
suggest that Homer's choice of imagery with regards to the
goddess' spectacular epiphany was truly inspired.
Although some early mythographers had sought to identify Athena
with the Moon, Velikovsky was the first to see an association
between that goddess and the planet Venus. In support of this
thesis, Velikovsky compared the mythology of Athena with that of
surrounding other goddesses whose identification with Venus was
beyond doubt (e.g., Inanna, Ishtar, Astarte, etc.). Early
Sumerian texts, for example, described Inanna as flying about
the skies in serpentine-form and raining down
destruction.[Fn.28]
In a recent paper devoted to the mythology of Athena I was able
to show that Athena's epiphany as a war-like goddess conforms to
a universal pattern, having close parallels in the traditions
surrounding other great goddesses--Inanna, Hathor, Anat, and
Kali among others.[Fn.29] Moreover, our analysis of the mythical
imagery surrounding these goddesses confirmed two points: (1)
each of the goddesses is explicitly described as a celestial
body, identifiable with the planet Venus; and (2) the imagery
surrounding each goddess is consistent with that universally
associated with comets (e.g., long, dishevelled hair; serpentine
form; identification with a torch; association with eclipses of
the sun; etc.).
It is readily apparent, therefore, that Velikovsky's hypothesis
is not as far-fetched as it might appear at first sight. Indeed,
as David Talbott and I have attempted to document in a series of
essays, the truth of the matter is that the evidence in favour
of Venus' comet-like past is far more pervasive than Velikovsky
ever imagined.[Fn.30] In addition to the evidence gathered from
comparative mythology one might point to the common terminology
shared by comets and Venus. Certainly it is significant to find
that the oldest terms employed to describe comets--e.g., "hair-
star", "torch-star", "serpent-star", "smoking-star", "bearded-
star", etc.--were likewise ascribed to the planet Venus, alone
among the planets.[Fn.31] Upon what hypothesis other than
Velikovsky's is it possible to account for this convergence of
language?
Equally compelling is the fact that the ancient mythology
surrounding the planet Venus overlaps to a remarkable extent
with that associated with comets. It is well-known, for example,
that from time immemorial comets were associated with such
motives as the end of the world, eclipses of the sun, the death
of great kings, etc.[Fn.32] An especially intriguing motive
identifies comets with the departing souls of great
kings.[Fn.33] The imagery attending the death of Caesar is
perhaps the most famous example of this ancient and widespread
motive, recalled in the famous words of Shakespeare as follows:
"When beggars die there are no comets seen;
the Heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes."
Hitherto unnoticed, however, is the fact that the very same
imagery was associated with the planet Venus, in the Old World
as well as the New![Fn.34] One of the most pivotal events in the
sacred history of ancient Mexico, for example, recalled the
cataclysmic occasion upon which the fiery soul of the ancient
sun-god (Quetzalcoatl) departed and became the planet Venus! The
Mesoamerican scholar Nigel Davies, upon acknowledging that this
was the original significance of the myth of Quetzalcoatl's
death and transfiguration, nevertheless objected that such an
interpretation is hardly to be entertained: "At some point in
the account, history ends and legend begins, unless one is
really to believe that the planet Venus was actually formed from
his body and had not previously existed!"[Fn.35]
Here it may well be asked: Granted that Velikovsky may have been
right with regards to the presence of cometary imagery in the
cult of Athena, of what significance is this finding for modern
science, gleaned as it is from the most obscure niches of Greek
mythology? It is the far-reaching ramifications of this finding
for ancient history and astronomy, of course, which have long
intrigued Velikovsky's admirers and incensed his detractors.
Stated simply: If the spectacle of Venus as a comet-like body
marauding about the heavens was once witnessed by ancient man
the world over, our entire conception of the recent history of
the solar system--not to mention celestial mechanics and a host
of other sciences--is fated to be turned upside down.
VELIKOVSKY'S METHODOLOGY
If, as it would appear, Velikovsky's initial foray into
comparative mythology produced some brilliant insights and
offered a promising key to understanding the ancient myths, to
what extent is it possible to speak of "Worlds in Collision" as
providing a model for a science of mythology? Here, as is so
often the case in Velikovsky's writings, it would appear that
brilliant insights do not necessarily reflect a systematic
methodology nor a logical progression of ideas. Rather,
traditions from throughout the ancient world are marshalled
forth at length with only minimal analysis or discussion of the
historical issues involved (e.g., is it possible to speak of
Sumerian accounts of the dragon-combat as reflecting historical
events of the mid-second millenium BCE?). Why he chose one
tradition over another conflicting tradition typically remains a
mystery. At his best, Velikovsky deduces the right explanation
upon a modicum of evidence, not from any detailed examination of
the sources. Prominent examples here include his insights into
the origins of the imagery surrounding the dragon and witch.
Elsewhere Velikovsky combs the relevant sources and uncovers
nary a credible idea; e.g., his discussion of the Oedipus
myth.[Fn.36]
Nor, for that matter, is Velikovsky's analysis of the traditions
surrounding Athena without its flaws. Consider his discussion of
Athena's epithet Tritogenia, which Velikovsky would interpret as
reflecting the planet-goddess' destructive influence upon a lake
(named Triton) on the African coast shortly after her "birth."
In this interpretation Velikovsky was following a late, patently
aetiological interpretation of Augustine.[Fn.37] The fact that
lakes with this name could be found wherever prominent cults of
Athena were localized went unnoticed, with negative implications
for Velikovsky's interpretation of the goddess' epithet.[Fn.38]
The pitfalls inherent in Velikovsky's lack of a systematic
methodology are best illustrated, perhaps, by the tension in his
work between myth as astronomical allegory and as literal
history, particularly as it applies to his discussion of the
Exodus. It was Velikovsky's interpretation of the unusual
circumstances surrounding the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt, of
course, which formed the theoretical basis for both "Worlds in
Collision" and "Ages in Chaos." Yet here, too, this pivotal event
has been virtually ignored by subsequent scholars influenced by
Velikovsky, despite the fact that his interpretation of the
Exodus provided the fulcrum for his radical reconstruction of
ancient history.[Fn.39]
The circumstances which inspired Velikovsky to abandon his
medical practice and emigrate to America whereupon he would
launch his extensive researches ultimately culminating in "Worlds
in Collision" are well-known and need not be rehashed here. By
his own admission, Velikovsky was so disturbed by the appearance
of Freud's "Moses and Monotheism"--the central thesis of which
maintained that Moses was an Egyptian whose monotheistic
religion was inspired by the religious reforms of the heretical
king Akhnaton--that he felt compelled to write a book in order
to set the record straight about the priority of Moses.[Fn.40]
It was while researching this book that Velikovsky arrived upon
the idea that a great cataclysm provided the backdrop for the
Hebrew Exodus from Egypt, and for the next ten years he was to
explore the ramifications of this hypothesis.
Fundamental to Velikovsky's understanding of ancient myth, as we
have observed, is the belief that it encodes historical events,
albeit on occasion in a figurative and symbolic manner. In some
notable instances, as in the myth of Athena's birth or the
Deluge, myth relates spectacular events involving the respective
planets. Elsewhere, however, Velikovsky suggested that myth
would be found to record biographical events from recent
history. The Greek myth of Oedipus, according to Velikovsky's
analysis, refers in large part to court intrigue in the Egyptian
Thebes of Akhnaton.[Fn.41]
An issue never addressed by Velikovsky is the following: Why do
some myths, such as that of Athena's birth from the head of
Zeus, commemorate the spectacular behaviour of planets, while
others, such as that of Oedipus, commemorate the extraordinary
deeds of human beings? Velikovsky's dualistic approach to
ancient mythology, needless to say, raises a host of questions
regarding his methodology, not the least of which is by what
criteria does one distinguish between the two types of myth?
In order to adequately appreciate the ramifications of this
apparent contradiction in Velikovsky's writings for his
historical reconstruction--as well as for a science of
mythology--it is necessary to attempt a definition of myth,
however tentative.
********************************
See the postings ***VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--One, Three, Fnotes***
for the rest of this article.
********************************
This electronic version of the article was prepared by:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* === Efemeral Research Foundation *
* // | \\ Exploring the Saturn Myth *
* // | \\ *
* ||-----o-----|| *
* \\ | // Internet: abeggs@peg.apc.org *
* //\ \..|../ / *
* || `../.\..' AARNet/ACSNet: abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au *
* `='' / \ *
* / \ APC Networks: peg.abeggs *
* / \ *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
From abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au Mon Jan 11 15:06:00 1993
VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--Three
[this and 3 other postings comprise an article from
***AEON--A Symposium on Myth and Science***,
Vol. III, No. 1, November, 1992]
*******************************
TOWARDS A SCIENCE OF MYTHOLOGY: VELIKOVSKY'S CONTRIBUTION
By: Ev Cochrane
*******************************
ON MYTH AND SACRED HISTORY
Countless definitions of myth have been offered, needless to
say, none wholly satisfactory. For our purposes here we would
endorse the opinion of Eliade, who defines myth as sacred
traditions about the origin of the world:
>Myth narrates a sacred history; it relates an event that took
>place in primordial Time, the fabled time of the `beginnings.'
>In other words, myth tells how, through the deeds of
>Supernatural Beings, a reality came into existence, be it the
>whole of reality, the Cosmos, or only a fragment of reality--an
>island, a species of plant, a particular kind of human
>behaviour, an institution.[Fn.42]
In his voluminous writings on myth, religion, and related
subjects, Eliade has argued that myth is typically a sacred
story related about primordial events which are believed to have
happened at the dawn of time, involving such themes as the
creation of the world, the flood, wars of the gods, the dragon-
combat, the origin of culture, etc. Mythological themes formed
the focal point of early culture and religious ritual, countless
aspects of daily life being designed to commemorate these sacred
events through imitation, mimicry, and simulation. Ancient
cities and temples, to take but one example, were designed and
oriented in accordance with the sacred original:
>All the Indian royal cities, even the modern ones, are built
>after the mythical model of the celestial city where, in the age
>of gold, the Universal Sovereign dwelt. And, like the latter,
>the king attempts to revive the age of gold, to make a perfect
>reign a present reality.[Fn.43]
What was true for ancient architecture was also true of ancient
law, sacrificial rites, art, sports, war, etc. In each case the
local custom was expressly patterned after the divine prototype,
revealed in the distant past.
A recurring theme in Eliade's writings is the intimate
relationship between myth and history. Not only does profane
history reveal numerous attempts to commemorate the sacred
events of myth (wars of conquest, for example), but on occasion
myth can be found to masquerade as history. Indeed, as numerous
scholars have come to recognize, it is not always easy to
distinguish between cosmological myth per se and sacred history
as found in many cultures. In early Rome, for example, Dumezil
found that although much of its ancient mythology had been lost,
it resurfaced as "history" in the accounts of Roman historians.
The famous account of Rome's first war and the taking of the
Sabine women is a case in point.[Fn.44]
Countless other examples could be offered in support of
Dumezil's hypothesis. The greatest god of ancient Egypt--Osiris-
-can be found masquerading as a mortal king in "histories" of
the Hellenistic period. Quetzalcoatl, the greatest god of
Mesoamerica, was represented in similar fashion by Aztec
chroniclers. Indeed, the "historization" of great gods as early
"kings' and "heroes" is so commonplace in ancient traditions
that one would be justified in speaking of a rule governing the
composition of tribal histories.
To return to Velikovsky's historical reconstruction:
How, then are we to interpret the Hebrew tradition of the Exodus?
As myth--defined, it will be remembered, as sacred traditions
concerning the origin of the gods and world--or as an objective
history of real people and events? If we approach the Old
Testament account of the Exodus from the standpoint of
comparative mythology it is evident that it contains more
than a trace of mythical elements which, were it not that
these particular traditions are so dear to us, we would
otherwise recognize as being typical of cosmogonic myth.
It is well-known, for example, that numerous peoples traced
their origins to a great god/hero who personally led them
upon an extended migration to their ultimate homeland.
Thus the earliest settlers of Italy were said to have been led
there by Mars; the Norse remembered a similar migration led by
Odin; while the ancient Aztecs were said to have followed
Huitzilopochtli to Mexico City.[Fn.45] While it was commonplace
in the last century to interpret such accounts in a Euhemerist
fashion--e.g., as actual migrations led by men of flesh and
blood--to do so today seems hopelessly naive.
A mythical aura surrounds other aspects of the Exodus-account as
well. The parting of the Red Sea, as several scholars have
recognized, is strangely reminiscent of the Symplegades-
motive.[Fn.46] Here, it will be remembered, the hero barely
succeeds in passing through some treacherous feature of the
natural landscape such as clashing rocks, while his evil pursuer
is caught and killed.[Fn.47]
The slaying of the Pharaoh, similarly, given his explicit
identification with the dragon Rahab in Rabbinic sources,
appears to bear more than a trace of the imagery associated with
the dragon-combat. The latter theme, alluded to in numerous
passages in the Old Testament, refers to the primeval occasion
in which the demon of chaos was vanquished by Yahweh himself (or
with the aid of a supernatural warrior-hero).[Fn.48]
The episode of the wandering in the wilderness also has numerous
parallels in the myths of other lands, a period of wandering
frequently distinguishing the events associated with the
Creation prior to the Creator finding a suitable spot to settle.
The darkness said to have accompanied the period of the
Israelite's wandering, similarly, would appear to relate to the
darkness which is typically said to have preceded Creation, such
darkness signifying a time of chaos.
The pillar of fire, said to have led the Israelites during their
nocturnal peregrinations in the desert, has long troubled all
but the most pious of scholars: "Of all the mysterious phenomena
which accompanied the Exodus, this mysterious Pillar seems the
first to demand explanation."[Fn.49] The account in Exodus 13,
so difficult to reconcile with what we know about the facts of
"history," is in perfect accord with the facts of comparative
mythology, where the World Pillar forms a universal
motive.[Fn.50] Indeed, in many traditions the World Pillar is
expressly described as a pillar of fire.[Fn.51]
In short, while this is not the place to argue the probable
origin of the Exodus traditions in early Hebrew cosmological
myth, enough has been said, perhaps, to at least suggest this
possibility. And such a conclusion, should it be confirmed by
future research, would significantly undermine the rationale
behind Velikovsky's attempted historical reconstruction.
Velikovsky's handling of the Exodus material illustrates what
would appear to be a glaring flaw in his approach to the ancient
sources. For want of a better term, I would note that Velikovsky
tended to favour a literal interpretation of the ancient
traditions. If the texts say the sea parted allowing for the
escape of the Israelites, Velikovsky seeks a meteorological
explanation of such an event. If the texts say that the
Israelites wandered forty years in darkness in the wilderness,
Velikovsky imagines the sun being obscured for a period
approximating four decades. If the texts say that manna rained
from the heavens, Velikovsky envisages carbohydrates falling
from the skies and seeks to provide a physical explanation for
such an occurrence.[Fn.52]
Although Velikovsky's interpretations here are within the realm
of possibility, he offered no arguments which would preclude
other, less exotic, explanations of such traditions. A prolonged
eclipse of the sun, for example, such as that described in
Exodus, would naturally tend to disrupt the accurate keeping of
time, and thus the tradition of a 40 year period of darkness
might simply be a conventional way of saying "a significant
period of time" (40 years, after all, is a suspiciously common
span in ancient texts). Certainly it would seem to be a
hazardous enterprise to make of such traditions a foundation
block in a radical reconstruction of ancient history.
In retrospect, Velikovsky's analysis of the Exodus-traditions
seems naive, especially so inasmuch as it comes from a
distinguished psychoanalyst who made his living analyzing
dreams, where the phenomena of displacement, distortion, and
condensation feature prominently. Indeed, as one peruses the
wealth of mythological material in Velikovsky's works one is
amazed at the relative dearth of analysis offered by him. In
most cases the myths are simply accepted at face value, as
literal records of ancient experience. Had Velikovsky applied
his formidable analytic tools to the mythical elements co-
mingled with the Exodus account, he would have found, I suspect,
that the flight of the Israelites, the fall of the Pharaoh, the
prolonged darkness, the time of wandering, and the pillar of
fire are all susceptible of alternative explanation, one
involving less strain on credulity.
CONCLUSION
Granted that our analysis has some merit, the question arises as
to how and why Velikovsky went wrong? I, for one, would suggest
that Velikovsky needlessly compromised his magnificent insight
that myth commemorates the spectacular behaviour of planets in
an attempt to proffer a scientific explanation to accommodate
the sacred history of the Jewish people. Had Velikovsky pursued
a more systematic approach in his mythological exegesis, he
would have discovered, I would suggest, that the sacred history
of the Jews is best understood by comparison with that of other
peoples, and that such a comparison reveals that history to be
less a record of human behaviour than an allegorical account of
planetary goings-on, albeit one that has been suppressed and
"historicized."
Alas, if Velikovsky's historical reconstruction rests uneasily
upon the historical/mythological record, such is not the case
with his thesis of planetary catastrophism, which is confirmed
again and again by the ancient sources. Indeed, it is my opinion
that Velikovsky's theory offers the best hope for a resolution
of the most fundamental questions facing comparative
mythologists. For the truth of the matter is that neither Eliade
nor any other scholar has offered a satisfactory explanation of
the content of myth. A glaring weakness in Eliade's
interpretation of myth, for example, is the inability to account
for the universal belief in a former Golden Age ruled over by a
primeval king under whom all manner of customs were revealed.
Yet as Velikovsky suggested--followed by David Talbott, Dwardu
Cardona, and myself--such traditions are readily understood if
once upon a time the planet Saturn ruled the visible heavens
during an unprecedented period of prosperity and cultural
advancement.[Fn.53] A Golden Age at the dawn of time was
recalled as the well-spring of civilization and deemed to be the
gift of Saturn for the simple reason that spectacular events
associated with the period of that planet's dominance provided
the "divine" inspiration for the origin and development of
cities, laws, religious rites, systems of writing, etc. Having
been, as it were, originally "revealed" by God on high, these
patterns of behaviour were not only held to be sacred, they
remained canonical for all time. To quote Eliade: "This `sacred
history'--mythology--is exemplary, paradigmatic: not only does
it relate how things came to be; it also lays the foundations
for all human behaviour and all social and cultural
institutions."[Fn.54]
No doubt we are still a long way from satisfactorily decoding
the astronomical events encoded in ancient myth. Of this much,
however, I feel confident: Velikovsky's discovery of the
prominent role played by Saturn and the other planets in ancient
thought not only ensures his place amongst the truly important
figures in the history of science, it provides the all-important
theoretical foundation for a science of mythology.
********************************
See the postings ***VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--One, Two, Fnotes***
for the rest of this article.
********************************
This electronic version of the article was prepared by:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* === Efemeral Research Foundation *
* // | \\ Exploring the Saturn Myth *
* // | \\ *
* ||-----o-----|| *
* \\ | // Internet: abeggs@peg.apc.org *
* //\ \..|../ / *
* || `../.\..' AARNet/ACSNet: abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au *
* `='' / \ *
* / \ APC Networks: peg.abeggs *
* / \ *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
From abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au Mon Jan 11 15:07:00 1993
VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--Fnotes
[this and 3 other postings comprise an article from
***AEON--A Symposium on Myth and Science***,
Vol. III, No. 1, November, 1992]
*******************************
FOOTNOTES TO:
TOWARDS A SCIENCE OF MYTHOLOGY: VELIKOVSKY'S CONTRIBUTION
By: Ev Cochrane
*******************************
1. How Velikovsky first came to entertain such a novel idea as
planetary catastrophism is something of a mystery. Jan Sammer,
Velikovsky's personal secretary during the later years of his
life, has expressed the opinion that the decisive event was most
likely Velikovsky's discovery in an obscure work of Brasseur de
Bourbourg of a quote from Varro, in which it was said that the
planet Venus once changed its appearance and course in the sky.
This finding, coming as it did during the inspired period
associated with his attempt to deduce the nature of the
cataclysmic circumstances surrounding the Exodus, led Velikovsky
to consider the possibility that a cataclysm involving the
planet Venus was behind that event. For Velikovsky's account of
these discoveries, see Stargazers and Gravediggers (New York,
1983), pp. 38-42.
2. Talbott has acknowledged that his researches were directly
inspired by Velikovsky's intriguing ideas regarding Saturn's
cataclysmic past.
3. E. Cochrane, "The Spring of Ares," KRONOS XI:3 (1986), pp.
15-22; E. Cochrane, "Indra: A Case Study in Comparative
Mythology," AEON II:4 (1991), pp. 61-66; D. Talbott, "Mother
Goddess and Warrior Hero," AEON I:5 (1988), pp. 53-65.
4. W Heimpel, "A Catalog of Near Eastern Venus Deities," Syro-
Mesopotamian Studies 4:3 (December 1982), pp. 9-22.
5. E. Cochrane, "The Birth of Athena," AEON II:3 (1990), pp.
10-18.
6. For a survey of early scholarship in the field, see B.
Feldman & R. Richardson, The Rise of Modern Mythology 1680-1860
(Bloomington, 1972).
7. See the discussion in J. Puhvel, Comparative Mythology
(London, 1989), pp. 13-20.
8. J. Frazer, The Golden Bough Vol. 4: Adonis, Attis, Osiris
(New York, 1961), pp. 97-114.
9. Lyttleton hold the fundamental Durkheimian principle to be
as follows: "That the persons, places, events, and situations
that received expression in myths are inevitably representations
of important social and cultural realities." See C. Lyttleton,
The New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley, 1973), p. 4.
10. G. Dumezil, The Destiny of the Warrior (Chicago, 1970). For
a survey of Dumezil's extensive writings see C. Lyttleton, The
New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley, 1973).
11. "[Myths] teach us a great deal about the societies from
which they originate, they help us lay bare their inner workings
and clarify the raison d'etre of beliefs, customs ... and most
importantly, they make it possible to discover operational modes
of the human mind, which have remained so constant over the
centuries, and are so widespread ... that we can assume them to
be fundamental and can seek to find them in other societies and
in other areas of mental life, where their presence is not
suspected," Quoted in I. Strenski, Four Theories of Myth in
Twentieth Century History (London, 1987), p. 132.
12. C. Levi-Strauss, "The Structural Study of Myth," in Myth: A
Symposium, ed. by T. Sebeok (London, 1965), pp. 81-106.
13. G. de Santillana and H. von Dechend, Hamlet's Mill (Boston,
1977), p. 177.
14. I. Velikovsky, Mankind in Amnesia (New York, 1982), pp. 99-
102.
15. G. de Santillana and H. von Dechend, Hamlet's Mill (Boston,
1977), p. 252-253.
16. Ibid., p. 49.
17. Ibid., p. 293. The authors' discussion of the World Tree
provides a perfect example of their tendency to "correct" the
ancient testimony in order to conform with the tenets of
astronomy. Upon discovering countless examples of Trees said to
have spanned heaven, supporting or obscuring the Sun, the
authors remark of the Indian Pillar (Skambha): "Skambha ... was
the World Tree consisting mostly of celestial coordinates, a
kind of wildly imaginative armillary sphere." Ibid., p. 269.
18. Ibid., p. 66-67.
19. Ibid., p. 3.
20. An exception to this statement is the recent study offered
by J. Worthen, The Replacement Myth (Tucson, 1991), which
betrays more than a trace of the influence of Hamlet's Mill.
21. See, for example, the following books: A. Aveni, ed., Native
American Astronomy (Ft. Worth, 1977); idem., Archaeoastronomy in
the New World (Cambridge, 1982); World Archaeoastronomy
(Cambridge, 1989); J. Carlson, Astronomy and Ceremonny in the
Prehistoric Southwest (1987); idem., "America's Ancient
Skywatchers," National Geographic 177:3 (March 1990), pp. 76-
107; R. Williamson, Archaeoastronomy in the Americas (Los Altos,
1981); idem., Living the Sky (Boston, 1984); E.C. Krupp, ed.,
Archaeoastronomy and the Roots of Science (Boulder, 1984).
Notice also the appearance of such journals as Archaeoastronomy,
published by The Center for Archaeoastronomy (1978 to present),
and Archaeoastronomy, Supplement to the Journal for the History
of Astronomy (1979 to present).
22. A. Aveni, Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico (Austin, 1981), pp.
187, 327.
23. C. Levi-Strauss, The Naked Man (New York, 1981), pp. 45-46,
71, 235.
24. An exception is offered by D. Cardona, "Child of Saturn,"
KRONOS VII:1 (1981), pp. 56-58.
25. Iliad 4:73-79. While this passage has been the subject of
various translations--the above is W. Rouse'e translation, The
Iliad (New York, 1938), p. 49--several distinguished scholars
have pointed to a comet as the source of Homer's imagery. See
the discussion in W. Gundel, "Kometen," RE, op. cit., p. 1145.
See also the discussion of this passage in B. Dietrich, "Divine
Epiphanies in Homer," Numen 30:1 (July, 1983), p. 56 who
translates as follows: "Like a comet which the son of Kronos,
crooked in counsel, sends in a shower of sparks as a shining
portent to sailors and the widespread army of peoples."
Velikovsky, op. cit., p. 178, and I. Fuhr, "On Comets, Comet-
like Luminous Apparitions and Meteors," KRONOS VII:4 (1982), p.
54, likewise compared Athena's descent to a cometary apparition.
It was apparently Dio Cassius 78:30:1 who first compared
Athena's epiphany to a comet.
26. E. Cochrane, "The Birth of Athena," AEON II:3 (1990), pp. 5-
28.
27. See the discussion of Worner, "Palladion," in W. Roscher's
Ausfuhrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie
(Hildesheim, 1965), pp. 3448-3449.
28. I. Velikovsky, Worlds in Collision (New York, 1973), pp.
185-186.
29. E. Cochrane, "The Birth of Athena," AEON II:3 (1990), pp.
10-18.
30. D. Talbott & E. Cochrane, "The Origin of Velikovsky's
Comet," KRONOS X:1 (1984); idem., "On the Nature of Cometary
Symbolism," KRONOS XI:1 (1985); idem., "When Venus was a Comet,"
KRONOS XII:1 (1987).
31. E. Cochrane, "On Comets and Kings," AEON II:1 (1989), pp.
53-75.
32. G. Jobe, Dictionary of Mythology, Folklore and Symbols (New
York, 1961), p. 360. See also E. Cochrane, "On Comets and
Kings," AEON II:1 (1989), pp. 53-75.
33. E. Cochrane, op. cit., pp. 56-58.
34. Ibid., pp. 60-64.
35. N. Davies, The Toltecs (Norman, 1977), p. 395.
36. I. Velikovsky, Oedipus and Akhnaton (Garden City, 1960). For
a detailed critique of Velikovsky's interpretation of the
Oedipus myth see E. Cochrane, "Velikovsky and Oedipus," AEON I:6
(1988), pp. 14-38.
37. I. Velikovsky, Worlds in Collision (New York, 1973), p. 178.
38. Given the prevalence of "Lake Tritons" one would be inclined
to suspect a celestial prototype behind the localized
imitations. Indeed, in a future paper I hope to be able to
establish the origin of this epithet.
39. Indeed, of Velikovsky's reconstruction of the events behind
the Exodus little has been written since the publication of
Worlds in Collision in 1950. A few exceptions to this general
statement include J. Bimson, Redating the Exodus and Conquest
(Sheffield, 1978); A. de Grazia, God's Fire (Princeton, 1983);
B. Feldman, Passover Marvels (Philadelphia, 1978); and E.
Cochrane, "In Search of Moses," an article distributed at the
annual Canadian Symposium for Interdisciplinary Studies in
September of 1983. Velikovsky's critics, of course, such as
Forrest and Stiebing, have not overlooked Velikovsky's handling
of the Exodus material. See W. Stiebing, Out of the Desert
(Buffalo, 1989), pp. 113-123. B. Forrest, "Papyrus Ipuwer and
Worlds in Collision," SIS Review 6:4 (1984), pp. 108-111.
40. I. Velikovsky, Stargazers and Gravediggers (New York, 1983),
pp. 27-31.
41. See footnote 36.
42. M. Eliade, Myth and Reality (New York, 1975), p. 6.
43. Idem., Cosmos and History (New York, 1959), p. 9.
44. G. Dumezil, Archaic Roman Religion Vol. 1 (Chicago, 1970),
pp. 66-77.
45. On the migration(s) led by Mars, see W. Roscher, "Mars,"
Ausfuhrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie
(Hildesheim, 1965), col. 2425-2427; on the migration led by
Huitzilopochtli, see H. Alexander, The Mythology of All Races:
Latin American (New York, 1964), p. 114.
46. A. Coomaraswamy, "Symplegades," in Studies and Essays in the
History of Science and Learning Offered in Homage to George
Sarton (New York, 1947), p. 477.
47. On the Symplegades motive see A. Cook, Zeus Vol. 3:2
(Cambridge, 1940), pp. 975-1015.
48. Velikovsky himself dismisses this view in Worlds in
Collision, op. cit., pp. 94-95. For a valuable discussion of the
dragon-combat in the Old Testament see J. Day, God's Conflict
with the Dragon and Sea (London, 1985), pp. 88-101.
49. W. Pythian-Adams, quoted in Velikovsky, op. cit., p. 95.
50. See here M. Eliade, Myths, Rites, and Symbols (New York,
1975) pp. 380ff. See also my discussion in "The Spring of Ares,"
KRONOS XI:3 (1986), pp. 15-21.
51. In addition to the pillar of fire in Plato's vision of Er,
witness the following passage from Euripides' Bacchae: "So spake
he [Dionysius], and there came `twixt earth and sky a pillar of
high flame."
52. Other examples of this tendency in Velikovsky's writings
include his interpretation of the Deluge as water emanating from
Saturn and inundating the Earth, whereupon it came to form the
Atlantic Ocean; his expectation that gold would be found on
Jupiter, presumably deduced from the report that Zeus-Jupiter
once rained "gold" on Danae; and his hypothesis that vegetation
proliferated on Earth in the wake of a nova-like explosion upon
Saturn, apparently deduced from the numerous myths in which new
flowers appear in the wake of a death of a great god or goddess.
See I. Velikovsky, Mankind in Amnesia (New York, 1982), p. 99.
53. I. Velikovsky, Mankind in Amnesia (New York, 1982), pp. 97-
100. D. Talbott, The Saturn Myth (New York, 1980); idem.,
"Reconstructing the Saturn Myth," AEON I:1 (1988), pp. 5-36; D.
Cardona, "The Road to Saturn," AEON I:1 (1988), pp. 108-129;
idem., "Intimations of an Alien Sky," AEON II:5 (1991), pp. 5-
34.
54. M. Eliade, Rites and Symbols of Initiation (New York, 1975),
pp. x-xi.
********************************
See the postings ***VELIKOVSKY UPDATE--One, Two, Three***
for the body of this article.
********************************
This electronic version of the article was prepared by:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* === Efemeral Research Foundation *
* // | \\ Exploring the Saturn Myth *
* // | \\ *
* ||-----o-----|| *
* \\ | // Internet: abeggs@peg.apc.org *
* //\ \..|../ / *
* || `../.\..' AARNet/ACSNet: abeggs@peg.pegasus.oz.au *
* `='' / \ *
* / \ APC Networks: peg.abeggs *
* / \ *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank