Illustrated by examples from myths = mythical narratives.
Theoretical challenge
Myths are passed down over long periods of time, during which they are constantly revised and adapted. This creates complex structures with multiple layers, or strata, which often lead to inconsistencies. How to deal with inhomogeneities and inconsistencies which often occur in mythical narratives?
Methodological response
Stratification analysis = Method for identifying and reconstructing different ‘strata’ in a variant of a (mythical) narrative (or in a sequence of events in general).
➔ Stratification analysis is a fundamental prerequisite for semantic, functional, or historical interpretations and classification efforts of mythical narratives.
4.1 Methodological steps
There are three main criteria that can be used to identify the nature and origin of different strata in mythical narratives:
- Analysis of inconsistencies (4.1.1)
- Analysis of traces of value judgements and hierarchical relationships (4.1.2)
- Analysis of traces of interhylistic interferences (4.1.3)
4.1.1 Analysis of inconsistencies
Explanation of the origin of inconsistencies in mythical narratives based on myth theory:
Religious significance + cultural valence + long tradition of mythical narratives lead to
➔ the polystratic nature of every myth variant, consisting in a combination of different layers (see Stratification of Myths)
Different layers lead to
➔ inhomogeneities and even inconsistencies within specific variants of mythical narratives
Methodological step:
Identifying inhomogeneities and inconsistencies in mythical narratives with the help of the TTEPP-criteria.
➔ The more strange things that seem out of place in a narrative (or event), the more reasonable it is to assume influences from different traditions, creating different layers in a mythical narrative.
4.1.2 Analysis of traces of value judgements and hierarchical relationships
Explanation of the origin of value judgements and the creation of hierarchical relationships in mythical narratives based on myth theory:
A myth is a narrative material „with an implicit claim to relevance for the interpretation and mastering of the human condition“ (C. Zgoll 2020, 75-6; see definition of myth).
Myth = relevant ➔ must fit to people’s worldview
Change of worldview ➔ people adapt mythical narratives
Main cause of change: power conflict, (new) hierarchy of the gods (see Myths as battle ground for competing world views)
This leads to (new) value judgements and definition of (new) hierarchical relationships in mythical narratives, resulting from power struggles over the authority of interpretation.
Methodological step:
Identifying techniques and strategies of value judgements and hierarchical relationships in mythical narratives.
Examples (see C. Zgoll 2019, 448-500):
- change of possession, e.g. through gifting, inheritance, theft, etc.
- creation of (hierarchic) relations between protagonists, e.g. through enthronement, marriage, birth etc.
- replacement/ substitution of a character
- ‘retirement’ of a character
- degradation of a character
- evaluating determinations
- fights, resulting in winner and loser
etc.
4.1.3 Analysis of traces of interhylistic interferences
Explanation of the origin of interhylistic interferences in mythical narratives based on myth theory:
The polystratic nature of every myth variant, i.e. the combination of different layers is sometimes due to the influences or interferences of other variants of the same or of other narrative materials.
Definition of interhylistic interferences = The phenomenon of narrative materials and the ideas behind them influencing and interpenetrating each other (see C. Zgoll 2019, 281).
N.B.: Intertextuality and interpictoriality are just the tip of the iceberg of the much broader phenomenon of interhylistic relationships.
Methodological step:
Identifying interhylistic interferences/ influences/ relationships through comparisons with other (often structurally or thematically similar) variants of (mythical) narratives.
4.2 Case Studies
See Publications.
Further reading: C. Zgoll 2021, 37-45.
References:
Zgoll, C. 2019, Tractatus mythologicus. Theorie und Methodik zur Erforschung von Mythen als Grundlegung einer allgemeinen, transmedialen und komparatistischen Stoffwissenschaft, Mythological Studies 1, Berlin / Boston. (Open Access: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110541588)
Zgoll, C. 2020, Myths as Polymorphous and Polystratic Erzählstoffe: A Theoretical and Methodological Foundation, in: A. Zgoll / C. Zgoll (ed.), Mythische Sphärenwechsel. Methodisch neue Zugänge zu antiken Mythen in Orient und Okzident, Mythological Studies 2, Berlin / Boston, 9-82. (Open Access: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110652543-002)
Zgoll, C. 2021, Grundlagen der hylistischen Mythosforschung. Hylemanalyse, Stratifikationsanalyse und komparative Analyse von mythischen Erzählstoffen, in: G. Gabriel / B. Kärger / A. Zgoll / C. Zgoll (ed.), Was vom Himmel kommt. Stoffanalytische Zugänge zu antiken Mythen aus Mesopotamien, Ägypten, Griechenland und Rom, Mythological Studies 4, Berlin / Boston, 9-50. (Open Access: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110743005-002)