Towards a Method of Mythology - Germanic Mythology

many events in the world of gods and men: the origin of culture, the battles between
order and disorder and between good and evil, and between the holy powers and
witchcraft. One should have then questioned himself or, more properly, questioned the
myths whether these events were associated causally and formed a chain or not. But this
question has never been posed by the nature-mythologists. It would break their circle,
because the undeserved freedom with which they interpret each mythic concept as an
expression of the activity of the sun, lightning, or the storm etc, is not possible except on
the condition that myths are regarded each as independent and collectively as constituting
a chaotic mass.
That a school such as this, whose premises are psychologically impossible and
otherwise refuted by the myths own epic condition, could have been the dominant school
for so long is a true wonder, but its explanation may be found in a circumstance that I
shall point out below.
I now come to the actual mythology.
In his Logic and particularly in his Methodlehre (1883), the ingenious
psychologist Wilhelm Wundt 4 has devoted some pages to mythological method.
Although he himself does not use the term mythogony, in accordance with the still
current usage which includes the field of mythogony under the heading mythology, he
draws a dividing line between mythogony and mythology and applies to each the
different tasks these sciences have, and to each the different methods they must follow.
With reference to mythology, in the sense I understand this word, he points out that its
first task is to establish the original identity between mythic formations, which were
separated by time and space.
Before I proceed, I want to consider this principle more closely. It naturally
follows that the aforementioned task of identification applies to mythic formations and
mythic cycles that are demonstrably connected to one another through a common origin.
The evidence for their common origin again lies in the affinity of languages. As a rule,
the closer this affinity in languages is, the longer or the later the people that spoke this
language lived together in prehistoric times, and the greater their common inheritance of
modes of thinking, customs, and practices must have been. Thus, the affinity of language
among the Goths, Scandinavians, Anglo-Saxons, Germans, etc. makes it necessary that,
at some time and not so very long ago, [433] they possessed a common language
(perhaps already divided into dialects), and a common mythic treasure (perhaps already
enriched with local stories in places).
Were the myths of the Anglo-Saxons, the Germans, the Scandinavians, etc. now
completely preserved, there would be no difficulty determining the common mythology
of the Germanic tribes. One would then have Germanic mythology completely laid out
before him, with its large complex of pan-Germanic myths and the local stories radiating
from it. This, however, is not the case.
4
Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1921), German psychologist and founder of experimental psychology; Author of
Logik, eine Untersuchung der Principien der Erkenntniss und der Methoden wissenschaftlicher Forschung
Bd.1: Erkenntnisslehre. [An Investigation of the Principles of Understanding and the Methods of Scientific
Research, Volume 1: Understanding], Volume. 2: Methodenlehre. [Teachings on Method].