Habent sua fata libelli
Thoughts on an early parody of Max Müller and other classics in comparative religious studies
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4372200 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Bruno Maier (0000-0002-8174-0873, University of Tübingen, corresponding author), Bernhard Maier |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 495-519 |
| Publication date | 2012-10-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Religion (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0048-721X • E-ISSN: 1096-1151 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0048721x.2012.681979 |
| OpenAlex | W2016792544 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 13 |
Books that have become classics', Thomas Bailey Aldrich once noted, 'always remind me of venerable colonels and majors and captains who, having reached the age limit, find themselves retired on half pay.'1 1Aldrich 1903: 20-21. To some extent, some of the earliest classics in the comparative study of religions may be said to share this fate, being today more frequently referred or alluded to than studied in any detail. Nevertheless, the author argues that there is still a good deal of unpublished material which may yet be put to good use in elucidating the context in which these authors lived, worked, and wrote. In fact, this material may even induce us to revise current notions and question popular assumptions. This article deals firstly with a parody of F. Max Müller's solar mythology, first published anonymously in 1870, examining it in the light of its contemporary reception and of what is known about its author (the theological writer Richard Frederick Littledale) and his circle of friends. Secondly, it considers the approaches to the study of religions taken by such scholars as F. Max Müller, William Robertson Smith, James George Frazer, and Theodor Nöldeke, discussing the extent to which the spirit of the times, personal experience, professional training, and other factors contributed to shaping these approaches. Special attention is paid to the private letters of these scholars, many of which have only recently been published or are as yet unpublished, suggesting that our insight into the origins of comparative religious studies as an academic discipline may be considerably enhanced by a more extensive use of these manuscript sources. In conclusion, the article considers the complex interrelationship between primary sources, secondary literature, and the modern historiography of scholarship, examining, by way of illustration, some points of interest in recent monographs in the field
George (robot · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Historical and Linguistic Studies · Religion and Society Interactions
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |