INTERPRETATION AND DEFINITION OF CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY 11MYTH AND SOCIETYMyth and Ritual: J. G. Frazer, Jane Harrison, and Robert Graves. A ritualist inter-
pretation of mythology is one of the most influential and persistent points of
view. Despite its faults, Sir J. G. Frazer's The Golden Bough remains a pioneering
monument in its attempts to link myth with ritual. It is full of comparative data
on kingship and ritual, but its value is lessened by the limitations of his ritual-
ist interpretations and by his eagerness to establish dubious analogies between
myths of primitive tribes and classical myths.
Similarly the works of Jane Harrison, Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Reli-
gion and Themis, are of seminal importance. Harrison falls in the same tradition
as Frazer, and many of her conclusions about comparative mythology, religion,
and ritual are subject to the same critical reservations. Frazer and Harrison es-
tablished fundamental approaches that were to dominate classical attitudes at
the beginning of the twentieth century.
Renowned novelist and poet Robert Graves has written an influential treat-
ment of Greek myths that is full of valuable factual information unfortunately
embedded in much fascinating but unsubstantiated and idiosyncratic analysis.
For him the definition of "true myth" is "the reduction to narrative shorthand
of ritual mime performed in public festivals, and in many cases recorded picto-
rially on temple walls, vases, seals, bowls, mirrors, chests, shields, tapestries,
and the like."^24 He distinguishes this true myth from twelve other categories,
such as philosophical allegory, satire or parody, minstrel romance, political prop-
aganda, theatrical melodrama, and realistic fiction. We single out Graves be-
cause he was perceptive enough to realize that literary distinctions may be as
enlightening as any other type of classification for classical mythology.
Yet stated most bluntly, this ritualist theory says that "myth implies ritual,
ritual implies myth, they are one and the same."^25 True, many myths are closely
connected with rituals, and the theory is valuable for the connection it empha-
sizes between myth and religion; but it is patently untenable to connect all true
myth with ritual.
Myth as Social Charters: Bronislav Malinowski. Important in the development of
modern theories is the work of Bronislav Malinowski, who was stranded among
the Trobriand Islanders (off New Guinea) during World War I; he used his en-
forced leisure to study the Trobrianders.^26 As an anthropologist and ethnogra-
pher he placed a high value on fieldwork in order to reach his final ideological
goal: "to grasp the native's point of view, his relation to life, to realize his vi-
sion of his world... ."^27
His great discovery was the close connection between myths and social in-
stitutions, which led him to explain myths not in cosmic or mysterious terms,
but as "charters" of social customs and beliefs. To him myths were related to
practical life, and they explained existing facts and institutions by reference
to tradition: the myth confirms (i.e., is the "charter" for) the institution, custom,