Talk:Rank–Raglan mythotype

i don't know wrote this article, but he would have to explain to me how lincoln scored 22 on the rank???!!! his father was a king, and his mother a virgin?????? --62.235.216.43

You can look up the source and find out - Francis Lee Utley, “Lincoln Wasn't There, or Lord Raglan's Hero,” CEA Chap Book (Washington, DC: College English Association, 1965;, supplement to The CEA Critic 22, June 1965). In part, Utley's piece does show that both Rank and Raglan are useless for anything historical and as such are an absurdity. In fact no serious historian uses it because it is arbitrary as the article cites. Harry Potter is more historical than Alexander the Great and Mithradates if you use the scale.--173.58.132.206 (talk) 09:21, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oeidpus

How does anyone figure Oedipus scores 21 or 22? I counted 13 for him, and that was counting dubious ones like "he made laws." Since he was a king I guess he did, but that's already covered by "he is a king". If they mean the decree to drive the parricide out of the city, "he made laws" would be a pretty strange way to describe it, if technically accurate. Someone must count things like "His offspring did not succeed him" which would have to mean something like, after his two sons succeeded him, no grandsons did. That's just cheating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.67.35 (talk) 19:06, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As Sienkewicz, Thomas. "Lord Raglan's Hero Pattern" reference shows how many points a person gets various on how the Rank-Raglan mythotype is applied.

Alexander the Great (356 - 323 BCE): 9 (Raglan gave him a 7)

Julius Caesar (100 - 44 BCE): 9 1/2

Augustus Caesar (63 BCE - 14 CE): 10

Napoleon Bonaparte (1769 - 1821): 8

Nicholas II, Tsar of All the Russias (1868 – 1918): 14

While some people doubt that Jesus and Buddha ever existed everybody else has clear definitive documentation that they existed.--BruceGrubb (talk) 23:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]