Rank-Raglan mythotype

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Rank-Raglan mythotype (sometimes called the hero archetypes) are narrative patterns proposed by Otto Rank and later on Lord Raglan that lists different cross-cultural traits often found in the accounts of heroes, including mythical heroes.[1][2]

History[edit]

Otto Rank, in 1909, developed a Hero pattern on that was very much based on Oedipus's legend, followed Freudian thought in that the pattern lingered on the Hero's relations with the parents and was limited to the first half of the life of the Hero:[2]

  1. Child of distinguished parents
  2. Father is a king
  3. Difficulty in conception
  4. Prophecy warning against birth
  5. Hero surrendered to the water in a box
  6. Saved by animals or lowly people
  7. Suckled by female animal or humble woman
  8. Hero grows up
  9. Hero finds distinguished parents
  10. Hero takes revenge on the father
  11. Acknowledged by people
  12. Achieves rank and honors

Lord Raglan, in 1936, developed a 22 point myth-ritualist Hero archetype to account for common patterns across Indo-European cultures for Hero traditions, following myth-ritualists like James Frazer and S.H. Hooke:[2]

  1. Mother is a royal virgin
  2. Father is a king
  3. Father often a near relative to mother
  4. Unusual conception
  5. Hero reputed to be son of god
  6. Attempt to kill hero as an infant, often by father or maternal grandfather
  7. Hero spirited away as a child
  8. Reared by foster parents in a far country
  9. No details of childhood
  10. Returns or goes to future kingdom
  11. Is victor over king, giant, dragon or wild beast
  12. Marries a princess (often daughter of predecessor)
  13. Becomes king
  14. For a time he reigns uneventfully
  15. He prescribes laws
  16. Later loses favor with gods or his subjects
  17. Driven from throne and city
  18. Meets with mysterious death
  19. Often at the top of a hill
  20. His children, if any, do not succeed him
  21. His body is not buried
  22. Has one or more holy sepulchers or tombs

When Raglan's 22 point outline is used, a Hero's tradition is considered more mythical the more of these traits they hold (a point is added per trait). Raglan himself scored the following Heros: Oedipus (21 or 22 points), Theseus (20 points), Romulus (18 points), Heracles (17 points), Perseus (18 points), Jason (15 points), Bellerophon (16 points), Pelops (13 points), Dionysos (19 points), Apollo (11 points), Zeus (15 points), Joseph (12 points), Moses (20 points), Elijah (9 points), Watu Gunung (18 points), Nyikang (14 points), Sigurd (11 points), Llew Llawgyffes (17 points), King Arthur (19 points), Robin Hood (13 points), Alexander the Great (7 points).[2]

Criticisms[edit]

Folklorist Alan Dundes has noted that Raglan did not categorically deny the historicity of the Heroes he looked at, rather it was their common biographies he considered as nonhistorical. Furthermore, Dundes noted that Raglan himself had admitted that his choice of 22 incidents, as opposed to any other number of incidents, was arbitrarily chosen.[2]

Folklorist Francis Utley argued that recent historical figures such as Abraham Lincoln fit all of Lord Raglan's 22 points and that Lincoln was a mythical figure.[3] Another recent historical figure that fit the Hero pattern quite well was John F. Kennedy, furthermore, William Wallace from the medieval period did as well.[4]

Classicist Thomas J. Sienkewicz did other rankings of numerous Heroes and among them that score quite high were actual historical persons like Muhammad (17), Jesus (18), Tsar Nicholas II (14), Mithridates VI of Pontus (22), and Buddha (15). Also fictional characters were scored as well, among those Harry Potter (8).[5]

Uses[edit]

This mythotype has been used in the Christ myth theory to argue that a historical Jesus did not exist despite the consensus among historians against the myth theory.[6][7] However, others such as Alan Dundes have noted that the Hero archetypes were designed to investigate the structure of received traditions, not deal with determining actual historicity of any individual.[2] As such, he argued that even if Jesus were to hypothetically fit the Hero patterns, it would not affect his historicity at all.[2]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Lord Raglan. The Hero: A Study in Tradition, Myth and Drama by Lord Raglan, Dover Publications, 1936
  2. ^ a b c d e f g Segal, Robert; Dundes, Alan; Raglan, Lord; Rank, Otto (1990). In Quest of the Hero. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691020620. 
  3. ^ 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)
  4. ^ Eddy, Paul Rhodes; Boyd, Gregory A. (2007). The Jesus Legend : A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. pp. 54–55. ISBN 0801031141. 
  5. ^ Sienkewicz, Thomas. "Lord Raglan's Hero Pattern". Department of Classics. 
  6. ^ Robert M. Price, 2011, The Christ Myth Theory and its Problems, ISBN 978-1-57884-017-5
  7. ^ Carrier, Richard (2014). On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might have Reason for Doubt. Sheffield Phoenix Press. ISBN 9781909697492. 

External links[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rank-Raglan_mythotype&oldid=701510515"