Talk:Proto-Indo-European mythology

How is any of this quotable? Consider the following: "In presenting his overview of G. Dumézil’s work on IE comparative mythology, C.S. Littleton wrote that in Dumézil’s view Roman religion can be understood only in relation to other IE religious systems and that “the most fruitful source of comparative materials is the ancient Indic literature” (1973: 118)." -- really now? Ficaia (talk) 02:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

• In the Vedic culture the oral tradition is very marked. The Vedic texts preserved much more of the PIE stock of legendry than any other IE branch. In fact no major mythological feature appears in two or more IE branches to the exclusion of the Vedic one, while, on the contrary, feature after feature appears in the Vedic lore in common with one or two other branches to the exclusion of the rest (disregarding the affinities of Vedic and Avestan since these two traditions formed a distinct branch). Thus the motif of the sacrificial dismemberment of primordial Man Puruswa and the resultant cosmogony (RV X, 10) has a parallel in the dismemberment of giant Ymir (z V yama) in the Norse tradition but nowhere else; the name of Vedic Firegod Agni appears only as the Hittite Agnis and the Slavic Ogon (and variants) and nowhere else; the name of V artificers Rbhu is most probably cognate with Gk Orpheus and Gmc Elf but has no mythological connection in the other branches; the same holds for V Va astos-pati and Gk Hestia and Rm Vesta; and so on. Thus the Vedic corpus seems to be a much more reliable source for PIE mythology than any other IE branch. This is all the more remarkable when one considers that the Vedic texts were transmitted for many centuries through a well organised oral tradition.
  • Kazanas, N. (2015). Vedic and IndoEuropean studies. Aditya Prakashan. , chapter Archaic Greece and the Veda, also in : Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. 82, No. 1/4 (2001), pp. 1-42

• In presenting his overview of G. Dumézil’s work on IE comparative mythology, C.S. Littleton wrote that in Dumézil’s view Roman religion can be understood only in relation to other IE religious systems and that “the most fruitful source of comparative materials is the ancient Indic literature” (1973: 118).
  • quoted in Kazanas, N. (2009). Indo-Aryan origins and other Vedic issues. Aditya Prakashan. ch. 3

• It is obvious that the RV contains a decisively greater portion of the common IE mythological heritage. In fact there is hardly a major motif common in two or more of the other branches that is not found in the RV.
  • Kazanas, N. D. (2001). Indo-European deities and the Rgveda. JOURNAL OF INDOEUROPEAN STUDIES, 29(3/4), 257-294.

• ...no major mythological (or religious) feature appears in two or more branches to the exclusion of the Vedic. On the contrary, feature after feature appears in the RV in common with one or two other branches to the exclusion of the rest—sometimes with the Greek and the Roman, sometimes with the Roman and the Celtic, and so on... The all-inclusiveness of the RV in the realm of mythology is also observable in the sphere of poetics. There is hardly a major poetic device in the various IE branches that is not present in the RV.
  • Kazanas, N. D. (2001). Indo-European deities and the Rgveda. JOURNAL OF INDOEUROPEAN STUDIES, 29(3/4), 257-294.

• The all-inclusiveness of the Vedic is all too apparent and quite remarkable. The Greek and Germanic managed to preserve only half as many deities as the Vedic. Yet, to take some examples, Gmc preserves the stems nep- (nef-/nev-) and savil/sol, but not the corresponding deities which are preserved in other branches. Greek too preserves nep-, andr- and zém- but, again, not the deities. Just as surprising are the very meagre retentions in Baltic, Slavic and, even more, in Anatolian. This situation can arise only from loss of memory of the significance of the mythological-religious figure over a long period of time because of lengthy geographical movement and/or absorption of new elements (sometimes forcibly, perhaps, through subjection) from other culture(s). It is a well known fact of history that people on the move for a long period tend to lose elements of their culture while their language suffers changes, as they meet with other cultures and/or have little leisure to pass their lore to the new generations—much more than a people remaining sedentary.
  • Kazanas, N. D. (2001). Indo-European deities and the Rgveda. JOURNAL OF INDOEUROPEAN STUDIES, 29(3/4), 257-294.