Lord Raglan on Mythic Heroes

[lpetrich]

Back in 1936, Major FitzRoy Somerset, 4th Baron Raglan, a.k.a. Lord Raglan, published a book on legendary heroes, The Hero, in which he worked out a sort of average hero biography:

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin;
2. His father is a king, and
3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grandfather, to kill him, but
7. He is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster parents in a far country.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
10. On reaching manhood he returns to goes to his future kingdom.
11. After a victory over the king, and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and
13. Becomes king.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully, and
15. Prescribes laws, but
16. Later loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
18. He meets a 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, but nevertheless
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres

He scored several heroes according to his profile, and he found:

Oedipus 21, Theseus 20, Romulus 18, Heracles 17, Perseus 18, Jason 15, Bellerophon 16, Pelops 13, Asclepius 12, Dionysus 19, Apollo 11, Zeus 15, Joseph 12, Moses 20, Elijah 9, Watu Gunung 18, Nyikang 14, Sigurd or Siegfried 11, Llew Llawgyffes 17, King Arthur 19, and Robin Hood 13.

To use Lord Raglan's profile, one must interpret it rather loosely, like make "king" be a general sort of great leader, rather than only a hereditary political leader. Also, Lord Raglan tended to use the most mythical variants of incidents in some hero's life, so he'll have something to study, if nothing else.

Lord Raglan had carefully omitted Jesus Christ, not wanting to stir up additional controversy, but Alan Dundes took him on, finding a score of 19 for him. I myself have found that Krishna, the Buddha, Harry Potter, Anakin Skywalker, Luke Skywalker, and Leia Organa all score rather high.

By comparison, well-documented heroes usually score very low, seldom above 6 or 7, especially in modern times. The main exceptions I've been able to find are Alexander the Great and Augustus Caesar, at about 10.

There are various problems with this profile, and I myself have thought of improvements:

Splitting royal and virgin into separate criteria.
Adding childhood-prodigy stories, like Augustus Caesar hushing up some frogs or Jesus Christ showing great learning in the Jerusalem Temple.
Zeus, Oedipus, Perseus, Romulus, King Arthur, Krishna, the Buddha, Alexander the Great, Augustus Caesar, Harry Potter, Anakin Skywalker, and Jesus Christ had all reportedly fulfilled prophecies.


As to why mythic-hero biographies should converge onto a profile that does not match well-documented heroes very well, I think that it is something psychological.

Such Lord Raglan convergence may also explain the numerous conspiracy theories about the assassination of President JFK. Many people seem to find it hard to believe that a lone lunatic could have brought him down. Instead, they prefer to believe something that fits into Lord Raglan criterion 18 about the hero dying a mysterious death.

[DMB]

Have you read Robert Graves's novel King Jesus (http://www.amazon.com/King-Jesus-Novel-Robert-Graves/dp/0374516642/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239449511&sr=1-1), which attempts to fit Jesus into the mythic hero mould?

[lpetrich]

I've read various reviews of it, but not the book itself; it has been hard for me to get a copy of it. But it does have some ingenious theories in it. Robert Graves speculates that Jesus Christ was a descendant of King Herod, and that that king ordered the killing of those Bethlehem baby boys because he wanted to get rid of his competition. In this speculation, Jesus Christ could feel justified in calling himself Messiah and King of the Jews, because he had recent royal ancestry.

However, I'll evaluate LR's profile step by step and address various criticisms as I go. I'll be sticking to the four canonical Gospels as far as possible.

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin;

She's not called the Virgin Mary for nothing; Jesus Christ was her oldest child.

As to royalty, that could happen out of a common explanation for the discrepancy between Joseph's Matthew and Luke genealogies. It is that one of them is for Mary instead of for Joseph, making her also a descendant of King David. But I don't find that very convincing.

Score: 1/2

2. His father is a king, and

Although Joseph lived as a commoner, both Matthew and Luke took the trouble to trace his ancestry back to King David. Since a Messiah must be descended from that king, we can count Joseph as an uncrowned king.

Score: 1

3. Often a near relative of his mother, but

Score: 0

4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and

Being impregnated by the Holy Spirit doesn't happen every day. Score: 1

5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.

He's the Son of God. Score: 1

6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grandfather, to kill him, but

King Herod orders the killing of the Bethlehem baby boys because he had learned that one of them will be the king of the Jews. Score: 1

7. He is spirited away, and

His parents flee to Egypt, taking him with them. Score: 1

8. Reared by foster parents in a far country.

They raise him in Egypt, but Mary is his mother and Joseph his (step)father, meaning that they are not true foster parents. Score: 1/2

9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but

Luke tells us about the great learning he displayed in the Jerusalem Temple one time. Score: 1/2

Some noncanonical gospels, like the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, go further, making Jesus Christ a childhood miracle worker.

10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom.

Yes. Score: 1

11. After a victory over the king, and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,

The Devil challenged Jesus Christ to work some miracles, and also offered JC the rule of all the kingdoms of the world in exchange for JC worshipping him, but JC turned him down, and the Devil slinked away. I think that this counts as a defeat of a big enemy. Score: 1

12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and

No. Score: 0

Although a relationship between him and Mary Magdalene is widely speculated on, neither the canonical Gospels nor most of the noncanonical ones contain much hint of such a relationship. The noncanonical Gospel of Philip describes Jesus Christ as lovingly kissing her on the mouth, but that's as far as it gets. In any case, Mary Magdalene is a commoner with nothing special about her.

13. Becomes king.

He becomes a great religious leader, and he even calls himself King of the Jews. Score: 1

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully, and

He preaches, he gets into arguments with Pharisees, and he works various miracles, but most of his career is not very dramatic. Score: 1

15. Prescribes laws, but

His teachings qualify as laws in an informal sort of sense; one must not be too literal-minded about Lord Raglan's profile. Score: 1

16. Later loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and

After his triumphant entrance into Jerusalem, both the people of that city and the Jewish leaders there turn against him, charging him with blasphemy for calliing himself the Messiah and the King of the Jews. Score: 1

17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which

He is put on trial, Peter disowns him, and he and JC's other disciples flee. Score: 1

18. He meets a mysterious death,

He dies after only three hours of crucifixion, which is unusually fast for a young man in good enough health to do a lot of walking. There were also earthquakes, a mysterious darkening, and corpses taking walks from their tombs. Score: 1

19. Often at the top of a hill.

He is crucified on a hill named Golgotha. Score: 1

20. His children, if any, do not succeed him.

Despite certain extracanonical speculations, he is childless. Score: 1

21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless

Like several other mythic heroes, his body is absent from his tomb. This is because he rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven. Score: 1

22. He has one or more holy sepulchres.

He has one in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. Score: 1

His total score: 18 1/2.

I've seen someone claim that Lord Raglan had invented his profile to discredit the historicity of Jesus Christ, but Lord Raglan had carefully avoided that subject and let others handle it. I suspect that that certain someone had noticed how well Jesus Christ fits it and was unwilling to accept the most straightforward conclusion, that the Jesus Christ of the Gospels is largely mythical, if not entirely mythical.

This does not rule out some historical prototype; completely historical people can end up with a lot of mythology attached to them. However, it suggests that the Gospels are very uninformative about the historical Jesus Christ, if there was one.

[Joykins]

Is there any "return of the king" criteria? He will return at his country's hour of need to rescue it at some unspecified time in the future?

I've seen several authors play with this one.

[lpetrich]

I don't think that Lord Raglan ever described anything like that, and I don't recall anything like that in most of the biographies of the legendary heroes that he studied. Jesus Christ's Second Coming is the only example I can think of at the moment. Could you point me to some examples of what you have in mind?

[Anne]

Barbarosa (http://www.thenagain.info/webchron/westeurope/FredBarb.html)was so mythic his people believed his grandson was him reincarnated.

From wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_I,_Holy_Roman_Emperor):
Legend says he is not dead, but asleep with his knights in a cave in the Kyffhäuser mountain in Thuringia or Mount Untersberg in Bavaria, Germany, and that when the ravens cease to fly around the mountain he will awake and restore Germany to its ancient greatness.

Alexander the Great (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great) also is supposed to 'come again' when needed. There is an expression I can't find right now about that.

Of course, there is also the Lady of the Lake, Nimue, who lies in wait with Excalibur to hand the sword over tot he next King. That's a little different, as it implies not a resurrection of a particular man, however. Although there are legends that say Arthur himself will come back,a nd is sleeping ala Barbarossa.

[HinduWoman]

I've read various reviews of it, but not the book itself; it has been hard for me to get a copy of it. But it does have some ingenious theories in it. Robert Graves speculates that Jesus Christ was a descendant of King Herod, and that that king ordered the killing of those Bethlehem baby boys because he wanted to get rid of his competition. In this speculation, Jesus Christ could feel justified in calling himself Messiah and King of the Jews, because he had recent royal ancestry.



Do you think it is possible that Graves was basing it on Krishna story?

Krishna was the evil king's own nephew and in line for inheritance. Owing to a prophecy the king killed all the children of his sister but did not succeed with Krishna because he was smuggled out.
Since this was a tribal society it was highly probable that it was the sister's son who would inherit and thus a direct threat the the king.

[Alex]

A key figure in James Frazer's study of magic and religion is the sacred king - sometimes identified as a god - who suffers, dies, and is reborn. This appears to symbolize or even guarantee the continuity of a society.

The ancient theory of a scapegoat justifies the sacrifice of an animal or human being in order that the sins of the community can be "washed away by his blood".

With a little poetic license, the life and death of Jesus Christ seems to fit into the sort of primitive traditions described in The Golden Bough.

[DMB]

King Arthur is supposed to come again in Britain's hour of need. But so is Sir Francis Drake.

[David B]

King Arthur is supposed to come again in Britain's hour of need. But so is Sir Francis Drake.

Well, there you are, then. King Arthur did return, reincarnated as Drake.

You can't prove that it didn't happen, so why not believe it?;)

Actually, is the above really any sillier than lots of rationales presented for accepting prophesies as genuine?

I think not.

David

[Anne]

King Arthur is supposed to come again in Britain's hour of need. But so is Sir Francis Drake.

Hey! I said that!

Am I on your ignore list?

[DMB]

King Arthur is supposed to come again in Britain's hour of need. But so is Sir Francis Drake.

Hey! I said that!

Am I on your ignore list?

Of course not! But you didn't mention Drake, did you? ;)

See this for Arthur: King Arthur's messianic return.

See also this: Sir Francis Drake

Considered a hero in England, it is said that if England is ever in peril, beating Drake's Drum will cause Drake to return to save the country. This is a variation of the sleeping hero folktale.

This entry is also interesting:

King in the mountain.

[Anne]

:cheeky:

Yeah, there are a lot.

lpetrich, you should take your info and enthusiasm and write an article.

[court and spark]

I wonder how Officer John McClane (http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0001752/) from Die Hard (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095016/) measures up, hmm...

[lpetrich]

Do you think it is possible that Graves was basing it on Krishna story?

Krishna was the evil king's own nephew and in line for inheritance. Owing to a prophecy the king killed all the children of his sister but did not succeed with Krishna because he was smuggled out.
Since this was a tribal society it was highly probable that it was the sister's son who would inherit and thus a direct threat the the king.
He certainly could have. But someone out to get the baby hero is a common part of hero mythology, and Lord Raglan had put that into his profile.

King Herod vs. Jesus Christ
Pharaoh vs. Moses
King Kamsa vs. Krishna
King Amulius vs. Romulus
King Laius vs. Oedipus
King Acrisius vs. Perseus
Pelias vs. Jason
Tantalus vs. Pelops
Hera vs. Hercules
Hera vs. Dionysus
Hera vs. Apollo
Kronos vs. Zeus
Lord Voldemort vs. Harry Potter

The Buddha has a variant: his father tried to raise him to be a good heir and not a religious leader. But despite his father's valiant efforts, he ended up becoming a religious leader -- and he fulfilled some prophecies by doing so.

And I found yet another prophecy-fulfilling hero, Theseus:
When (his mother) Aethra became pregnant, (his father) Aegeus decided to return to Athens. But before leaving, he buried his sandals and sword under a huge rock and told her that when their son grew up, he should move the rock, if he were hero enough, and take the tokens for himself as evidence of his royal parentage.
Which he did. Sort of like pulling a sword out of a stone. :)

(Anne and DMB on the legendary second comings of Alexander the Great, Barbarossa, King Arthur, Sir Francis Drake, and King in the mountain folklore...)

The Twelver sect of Shiite Islam has a similar belief. According to that sect, Mohammed had been succeeded by 12 great imams (Muslim religious leaders), and that Allah decided to hide the 12th of them somewhere. When this 12th one, Mohammed al Mahdi, comes out of hiding, he will be accompanied by Jesus Christ, and he will help build a perfect and just Islamic society.

The Twelver sect is the largest Shiite sect and the main Shiite sect in Iran; that's what Iran's President Ahmadinejad had in mind when he talked about the second coming of the Mahdi.

[Joykins]

I don't think that Lord Raglan ever described anything like that, and I don't recall anything like that in most of the biographies of the legendary heroes that he studied. Jesus Christ's Second Coming is the only example I can think of at the moment. Could you point me to some examples of what you have in mind?

King Arthur, the 12th Imam.

I see I should have read the thread before responding.

There is a version of the Matter of Britain which has Arthur slaughter a bunch of children trying to get at Mordred.

[lpetrich]

I couldn't resist bumping this thread. I've scored several heroes usually considered mythical, and also several well-documented ones, including well-documented ones at the present day. The latter sort of hero sometimes fits some of Lord Raglan's criteria, but almost never fits several of the others.

There is only one high-scoring one that I've been able to find out about, and that is Czar Nicholas II (http://department.monm.edu/classics/Courses/Clas230/MythDocuments/HeroPattern/NicholasII%20Pattern.htm) (from The Hero Pattern (http://department.monm.edu/classics/Courses/Clas230/MythDocuments/HeroPattern/default.htm)). And he got 14.

But here's what's more typical of recent heroes:

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin;
2. His father is a king, and
They seldom come close to having eminent ancestry, though they may be first or only children.

3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
That is rare, and I don't know of any examples of that.

4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
I don't know of any claimed examples of that for recent heroes.

6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grandfather, to kill him, but
I don't know of any examples of that either.

7. He is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster parents in a far country.
I don't know of any clear examples of that, though childhood travels may half-count.

9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
We sometimes learn childhood details.

10. On reaching manhood he returns to goes to his future kingdom.
11. After a victory over the king, and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
The closest I can think of is JFK barely winning the 1960 election against his predecessor's vice president, Richard Nixon.

12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and
Not very common either.

13. Becomes king.
A free point for all of them.

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully, and
Recent heroes are often known for very eventful reigns.

15. Prescribes laws, but
Some of them are noted for doing so, like Napoleon, Abraham Lincoln, and Adolf Hitler. Charles Darwin may also qualify, with his "laws" being what to look for in evolutionary biology.

16. Later loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
It happened to Nicholas II, but not to the others. Even losing ones like Napoleon and Hitler had diehard followers who were only dissuaded by the prospect of defeat.

17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
18. He meets a mysterious death,
That is not very common, though it is widely believed about JFK.

19. Often at the top of a hill.
Not very common. In fact, Nicholas II and Adolf Hitler died in the opposite sort of locale, in underground rooms.

20. His children, if any, do not succeed him.
Very common, likely because hereditary succession has not been very common in modern times. The closest I can think of is JFK's family members' political careers, and also Charles Darwin's son George being a noted scientist in his own right, though not in evolutionary biology.

21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres
Not very common, though Hitler's body was never found and Nicholas II's body was buried in an out-of-the-way place.


So while well-documented heroes often satisfy some of Lord Raglan's criteria, there are several that they do not satisfy.

They often do not have very notable parentage. Abraham Lincoln and Adolf Hitler's parents were very ordinary sorts of people.

Though prophecy is my proposed criterion rather than Lord Raglan's, there is no documented before-the-fact prophecy of the career of any well-documented recent hero. I've seen various after-the-fact prophecies, like interpretations of the works of Nostradamus, but that's about it.

And nobody ever tries to kill them in their infancy. I find it amusing to think of what kill-the-baby-hero stories there might possibly be about recent heroes.


In 1808, in the southern US, some plantation owners and fundamentalist pastors get together to try to divine their future and the future of their way of life. They had braced themselves for possible setbacks and disasters, but they did not expect to find the horrors that would lie in wait for them in the future.

On February 12 on the next year, two gentlemen would be born whose words and actions would be absolutely devastating to their successors' careers. Abraham Lincoln would outlaw slavery and Charles Darwin would convince a lot of people that we are descended from long-ago apes and monkeys.

So they plot to try to keep that from happening. They send delegations to central Kentucky and Shrewsbury, England, and those delegations lie in wait for the births of those gentlemen. When that day approaches, they try to convince the authorities that a terrible criminal will be born that day, an evil monster who will declare war on all that is true and good and moral. When that fails, they convince various local people of that, who then go and stake out various hospitals and the like.

Leaving nothing to chance, they decide to start a few days before, and their baby kidnapping and killing scares the Lincolns and the Darwins, whose female ones are very close to giving birth.

Thomas Lincoln and Nancy Hanks make their way north, gradually hitchhiking their way northward in the cold winter weather. Nancy gives birth to Abraham along the way, but she and Thomas do not stop until they reach Canada, where they become farmers near Toronto.

In the meantime, Robert Darwin and Susannah Wedgwood also get scared, and they also decide to flee. Since the plotters had come a long way, they figure that they will also have to go a long way. Since the north Atlantic is dangerous sailing in the wintertime, they decide to go somewhere farther south. They go by stagecoach southward to Portsmouth, and Susannah gives birth to Charles along the way. At Portsmouth, they catch the next ship to Australia, and they settle near Sydney there.

But as they grow up, Abraham and Charles become restless, and they move back to the United States and the United Kingdom, where they start their higher education and their careers.

[Eudaimonist]

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin;
2. His father is a king, and
3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grandfather, to kill him, but
7. He is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster parents in a far country.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
10. On reaching manhood he returns to goes to his future kingdom.
11. After a victory over the king, and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and
13. Becomes king.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully, and
15. Prescribes laws, but
16. Later loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
18. He meets a 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, but nevertheless
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres

I got a zero. Darn. :(

[lpetrich]

Of course. :D

More seriously, I will concede that I'm not that great a storyteller. But I do think that it would make a very dramatic narrative.

The Lincolns and the Darwins rescuing their precious baby boys by fleeing across the cold landscapes of Indiana and England in the middle of winter. With the Darwins taking a ship to Australia.

Louisville. Indianapolis. Fort Wayne. Detroit. Toronto.
Portsmouth. Lisbon. Dakar. Lagos. Luanda. Cape Town. Tamatave. Colombo. Jakarta. Darwin. Brisbane. Sydney.


One can expand this myth motif even further.

Some psychiatrists plotting to kill the baby L. Ron Hubbard.

Some rabbis and Jewish bankers and Jewish Marxists plotting to kill the baby Adolf Hitler.


But a broader point is: why don't such things happen nowadays? Where did all the miracles go? In his Essay on human understanding, philosopher David Hume noted that miracles had become remarkably scarce in his day, and he noted that 250 years ago. It is still true today.

[rcscwc]

Raglan on Krishna

Quote:
1. Hero's mother is a royal virgin

Princess, yes. Virgin NO


Quote:
2. His father is a king, and

A prince, yes. A king NO


Quote:
3. Often a near relative of his mother

Not at all.


Quote:
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual

Nothing unusual. Conceieved just like you and me.



Quote:
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god

Son of no god. Himself is God.


Quote:
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grand father to kill him, but

Maternal uncle did seek to kill Him.


Quote:
7. He is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster parents in a far country

Yes to both. But not in a far country. In fact, He was reared in a land just across the river Yamuna.



Quote:
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but

A lot is known about Krishna's childhood and boyhood.



Quote:
10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future Kingdom

Which was not the case. He did not ascend any throne.



Quote:
11. After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast

As a child and a boy he vanquished many demons. And He did kill His tyrant uncle in single, unarmed combat.



Quote:
12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and

Princess yes, NO to rest.


Quote:
13. And becomes king
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and

Never ascended a throne.


15. Prescribes laws, but

He laid down no new laws, but clarified Dharma.


16. Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which

NO to all of these. Being God, He gave favours but did need any.



Quote:
18. He meets with a mysterious death

His "death" account is chronicled.


Quote:
19. Often at the top of a hill

Under a tree, but no hill is mentioned.


Quote:
20. His children, if any do not succeed him

Nothing to succeed to.


Quote:
21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless

Body vanished.

Quote:
22. He has one or more holy sepulchres.

None. No tomb or mausoleum, crypt etc

You can give a score.

[Politesse]

One thing I've noticed about this is that although en totale the mythology surrounding heroic characters approaches Raglan's points, individual accounts seldom include them all- and those points accumulate over time as the myth set ages. So for instance, Barbarossa in the earliest historical documents barely warrants a mention except as a two-bit Crusader who harried the Italians for a while, but when all his folk mythology is considered manages a score of 17. I think this is relevant to why recent heroes fit less- there hasn't been as much time for the usual elements to be slowly added in. If they aren't there, they will be eventually. The best example I can think of would be the first five Christian Gospels and Jesus- if you look at them chronologically, the score increases with each one save John which is anomalous in its non-biographical focus.

Thomas (50-90 AD): 6
Mark (60-70 AD): 10
Matthew (70-80 AD): 15
Luke (70-100 AD): 16
John (90-120 AD): 11

But altogether, he manages a score of 18-19 between the five, depending on whether you consider the Magdalene a "wife". So its clear that Jesus fit the Raglan profile better with each passing decade- the sudden appearance of infancy narratives in works written after the Jewish War (when the likelihood of correction by people with living memory dissappeared) is a good example of how it happens. Probably, Napoleon and Rasputin will do the similarly, given enough time.

[lpetrich]

Politesse, that's an interesting issue. Lord Raglan's profile certainly helps in quantifying it.


Over at rationalpagans.com jess had recently asked me (http://www.rationalpagans.com/viewtopic.php?p=32127#p32127) to score King David in the Bible. Here is what I found:

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin;
She's not mentioned in the Bible, though the Talmud identifies her as Nizbeth daughter of Adael: 0

2. His father is a king, and
Jesse son of Obed is an undistinguished commoner: 0

3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grandfather, to kill him, but
7. He is spirited away, and
8. Reared by forest parents in a far country.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
No hint of any of that: 0

10. On reaching manhood he returns to goes to his future kingdom.
He was always in his kingdom: 0

11. After a victory over the king, and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
Goliath: 1

King Saul had chosen him to lead his armies, David leads his armies against the Philistines in several battles, and Saul gets jealous and plots to kill him.

12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and
He marries several women: Michal, Ahinoam, Abigail, Maachah, Haggith, Abital, Eglah and Bathsheba. Michal is a daughter of Saul: 1

13. Becomes king.
After Saul commits suicide to avoid getting captured, David gets appointed king by the men of Judah: 1

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully, and
He has a long fight with Saul's son Ish-bosheth and his followers, and after defeating them, he conquers the Jebusite fortress Jebus (Jerusalem), making it his capital. He leads several more conquests, he brings the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem, and he has a sex scandal involving Bathsheba. He then suppresses some rebellions and suffers through God's dislike of statistics, among other things: 0

15. Prescribes laws, but
Nothing notable: 0

I doubt that being a singer-songwriter would count.

16. Later loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
In his old age, his son Adonijah declares himself king: 1/2

17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
Bathsheba and Nathan convince David to make his son Solomon king instead. David even gives final instructions to Solomon: 1/2

18. He meets a mysterious death,
19. Often at the top of a hill.
No sign of either: 0

20. His children, if any, do not succeed him.
Solomon: 0

21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless
He is indeed buried: 0

22. He has one or more holy sepulchres
None mentioned: 0

King David's Lord Raglan score: 4

It's interesting that he should score well within the range of well-documented people, especially more recent ones.

Like recent well-documented people, his ancestry was not noted for having great leaders in it.

Even his death was not very unusual -- he seems to have died of old age. Not long before, he slept with a young woman, Abishag the Shunamite, to keep him warm. However, despite his earlier womanizing, he did not have sex with her.

[Anne]

Saul and Solomon are fairly 'historic' as well, if one uses the profile as a judge how mythic a person is/was.

As far as I can tell, it's believed that all three of them were historic people and what's in the bible is fairly accurate.

hey! Could you cross post Romulus and Remus? There is some proof that their legend is based on historic fact.

[lpetrich]

I hadn't done a blow-by-blow analysis of Romulus's career in that ratpags thread, but I'll do so here.

Lord' Raglan's Hero Pattern (http://department.monm.edu/classics/courses/clas230/mythdocuments/heropattern/default.htm) mentions Lord Raglan scoring him as 19. I shall explain that scoring:

1. Hero's mother is a royal virgin;
His mother Rhea Silvia was King Numitor's daughter: 1

2. His father is a king, and
His reputed human father was King Amulius: 1

3. Often a near relative of his mother, but
Amulius was Rhea Silvia's father's brother: 1

4. The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
Rhea Silvia gets to see the Roman god Mars: 1

5. He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
Mars: 1

6. At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grand father to kill him, but
Amulius demands that that Romulus and his twin brother Remus be killed: 1

7. he is spirited away, and
A servant puts the twins into a basket and places it in the Tiber River: 1

8. Reared by foster parents in a far country.
After floating down the river, the basket washes up on shore, a wolf takes care of the baby twins for a while, then a peasant couple adopts them: 1

9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but
Yes: 1

10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future Kingdom.
When the twins grow up, they return to Amulius's Alba Longa home: 1

11. After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
They confront and kill Amulius. Romulus and Remus then go off to found their own city. They fight over where it will be located, and Romulus kills Remus: 1

12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and
Hersilia had no notable ancestry: 0

13. And becomes king.
He founds Rome: 1

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and
Relative to his earlier life, yes: 1

I think that this needs to be clarified, because something like the kidnapping of the Sabine women could certainly qualify as a big event. However, Romulus is secure in his position the whole time.

15. Prescribes laws, but
He founds the Roman Legions and the Roman Senate, among others: 1

16. Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
He overreaches himself and starts acting autocratic, which displeases the Senate: 1

17. Is driven from the throne and city, after which
However, he stays in office: 0

18. He meets with a mysterious death,
During a storm, he was carried up into heaven: 1

19. Often at the top of a hill,
No: 0

20. His children, if any do not succeed him.
Numa Pompilius was not even close to being one of his children: 1

21. His body is not buried, but nevertheless
It is gone: 1

22. He has one or more holy sepulchres.
His successors built some shrines for him, like at that wolf's cave: 1


As to possible historicity, there's a bit of evidence that has recently been proposed. It is the finding of a cave that could have been the Lupercal, that wolf's cave. However, that argument seems rather weak, because someone could have identified that cave as that wolf's cave well after the fact.


However, Romulus and Remus fit the Indo-European divine twins mytheme much better -- there are Vedic, Greek, Germanic, Baltic, and Slavic versions of it.

[Anne]

Thanks. I'll assume that there's some historicity under the later mythic additions.

can I C&P?

[rcscwc]

I've read various reviews of it, but not the book itself; it has been hard for me to get a copy of it. But it does have some ingenious theories in it. Robert Graves speculates that Jesus Christ was a descendant of King Herod, and that that king ordered the killing of those Bethlehem baby boys because he wanted to get rid of his competition. In this speculation, Jesus Christ could feel justified in calling himself Messiah and King of the Jews, because he had recent royal ancestry.



Do you think it is possible that Graves was basing it on Krishna story?

Krishna was the evil king's own nephew and in line for inheritance. Owing to a prophecy the king killed all the children of his sister but did not succeed with Krishna because he was smuggled out.
Since this was a tribal society it was highly probable that it was the sister's son who would inherit and thus a direct threat the the king.
No. Krishna was not in line of succession of the Mathura. Throne passed from father to son, invariably.

In fact after Kamsa was killed, his father got back onto the throne, from which he was deposed.

[Rie]

:DWow! That there bit about coming again.. twice? In an hour or one lifetime? Oh sorry , my bad. He gets to come again in 'our hour of need'! Silly me.

[Berthold]

Saul and Solomon are fairly 'historic' as well, if one uses the profile as a judge how mythic a person is/was.
There are serious doubts about the accuracy of the OT about Solomon. See the works of Finkelstein (http://books.google.at/books?id=uH7Kg9yEc7AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=finkelstein,+solomon&source=bl&ots=h_tV_BsPos&sig=if2WyQjlTRR1UUtXqwyv00TRRVA&hl=de&ei=5yUvTLOEKMqeOIz6zJIC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false).

[lpetrich]

Saul and Solomon are fairly 'historic' as well, if one uses the profile as a judge how mythic a person is/was.
There are serious doubts about the accuracy of the OT about Solomon. See the works of Finkelstein (http://books.google.at/books?id=uH7Kg9yEc7AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=finkelstein,+solomon&source=bl&ots=h_tV_BsPos&sig=if2WyQjlTRR1UUtXqwyv00TRRVA&hl=de&ei=5yUvTLOEKMqeOIz6zJIC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false).
That's for entirely different reasons -- what sort of a kingdom he had likely had. The Bible tells us that he had ruled a big kingdom that included the later northern and southern kingdoms. However, none of Solomon's contemporaries mentioned him and his supposed empire.

So a historical King Solomon likely ruled some area around Jerusalem that became part of the later southern kingdom.

[Rie]

I just want to say "WOT about Brunhilde and her clan?"

[Berthold]

If you google the name, only few of the findings are mythical. ;)

[Rie]

But Brunhilde qualifies as a hero doesn't she? She stars in Operas 'n all ? And i'm sure she and Siegfied knew each other and equally inspired Adolf in years to come... all blond and buxom ?

[Berthold]

But Brunhilde qualifies as a hero doesn't she? She stars in Operas 'n all ? And i'm sure she and Siegfied knew each other and equally inspired Adolf in years to come... all blond and buxom ?
Oh, of course. My remark was about the fact that Brunhilde is a quite common first name in German (well, some parents have weird tastes when naming their children).

Guess who named a whole cluster of subspecies after Wagnerian characters?
Stephen Jay Gould, in his beloved snail genus Cerion.

[Anne]

Saul and Solomon are fairly 'historic' as well, if one uses the profile as a judge how mythic a person is/was.
There are serious doubts about the accuracy of the OT about Solomon. See the works of Finkelstein (http://books.google.at/books?id=uH7Kg9yEc7AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=finkelstein,+solomon&source=bl&ots=h_tV_BsPos&sig=if2WyQjlTRR1UUtXqwyv00TRRVA&hl=de&ei=5yUvTLOEKMqeOIz6zJIC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false).

very cool, thanks.

please note, historic was in quotes and I did use 'if'.

[Rie]

Wasn't Gould the man who categorised and wrote about birds? And his books had beautiful illustrations?

[lpetrich]

Rie, John Gould was the 19th cy. bird artist, and Stephen Jay Gould the 20th-cy. paleontologist.

[Berthold]

And, as the latter once wrote, they were not, as far as he knew, closely related.

[Rie]

But it's not like Smith as a name where you would not expect that all Smiths were related is it? And both Goulds were scholarly and delved into aspects of nature?

I mean that maybe if you could trace back a little way they might well be from the same genealogical strand? And he did say 'As far as he knew'?

[Politesse]

But it's not like Smith as a name where you would not expect that all Smiths were related is it? And both Goulds were scholarly and delved into aspects of nature?

I mean that maybe if you could trace back a little way they might well be from the same genealogical strand? And he did say 'As far as he knew'?
There is more than one English Gould family, though. The name translates to "the golden" and used to be in more common use as a title or term of endearment.

[Berthold]

I added the "as far as he knew" and the "closely" in order to forestall obvious objections*. :)

Gold and combinations with it are quite common names in European Jewish tradition.

ETA: *He wrote, when mentioning his namesake, just, "no relation".

[BioBeing]

Lord Raglan had carefully omitted Jesus Christ, not wanting to stir up additional controversy, but Alan Dundes took him on, finding a score of 19 for him. I myself have found that Krishna, the Buddha, Harry Potter, Anakin Skywalker, Luke Skywalker, and Leia Organa all score rather high.

Re-reading this, I'm reminded that Lucas was a big fan of Joseph Campbell, and incorporate many "mythic" elements into Star Wars, so its really no surprise that Luke and Anakin score highly.

[lpetrich]

Some of it's rather glaringly obvious. Anakin Skywalker's father was the Force, thus making him much like all those legendary god-human hybrids. Luke and Leia were rescued in their infancy and then raised by foster parents. When they grew up, they overthrew their father. Etc.

[Anne]

heretics!