Tyra
Member
Studying Hinduism really gives you this interconnected feeling of the ancient indo-aryan/european religions....
Some obvious (and notable) things are the heirarchies of the Gods and Goddesses; ex: Dyaüs Pitr and the connections to Zues, Óðinn, etc. there sons (Dyaüs was the father of Indra, God of the storm (had a twin though - Agni), Óðinn and his buttload of kids (most notable Þórr, another God of the Storm). Hell, you can even compare the creation of the universe/world with Ymir and Purusha (both dismembered).
The major differences though are the order and change in which the family relationships happen - they all seem to go back to one root order, and the split off and divide as time moves on; mothers become sisters or daughters, some pair up to represent other forces fo nature that people started dualizing, and some traits switched over to other Gods (Óðinn and the hunt, death, war - completely comparable to Rudra, or Lugus/Lú with his magic and poetry); Vritra is comparable to Jörmungandr in there animosity towards Indra/Þórr, etc. (I haven't even started talking about Surtr and his domain yet!)
Another ex: Óðinn, Vi, and Vé (Vi & Vé...seriously, are those the only recorded names for them? What of Lóðurr?) are 3rd generation gods (sound Greek anyone?) - again though, where the greeks had the devourment of the children (Χρόνος => Ouranus => Krónos => Ζεύςand etc. - What did the norse have in this area? Búri and Borr aren't talked of much afterward where they're first mentioned...ayone care to elaborate on why this is? What theories there are for this?
The etymological roots of each word make it completely obvious that they are connected (if the translations are indeed correct).... I suppose I want to know if anyone knows about any MAJOR studies on the comparisons of these various religions? Because if there isn't...I just found my newthesis for grad school
Dude, I totally missed this question somehow! It is an interesting one, and it has been studied at length. The most prominent researchers are Sir William Jones and Dumézil. Jones was the one who first saw the connection between the language in the Vedic scriptures and the greek and latin scriptures, which started not only the study of the languages as being inter-related, but also, as a consequence, the religions. Dumézil studied the religious aspect at around the time of WWII. Tons of work is built upon his research, and most of his hypothesies stands unchallenged to this day. If you wanted something really interesting to study, seriously, I'd like to see a paper on Dumézil himself and how it relates to the study of Indo-European religions. Turns out that his research was partially funded by Mussolini, in response to the Germans during the war depicting their ancestors and their germanic culture as being the ultimate Über-mensch culture, so much better than all others. Obviously, Dumézil based much of his research on Roman and Greek texts, where the Germanic tribes were (mostly, with the notable exception of Tacitus) depicted as stupid, uncivilized, over-sized Barbarians who lived in the sticks in animal pelst while the Grek and Romans were so much more refined. You can follow this depiction of the Germanic tribes based on Roman political propaganda right through to this very day. It is very interisting how much of Dumézil's almost sacred theory can be unraveled just by proving that it is based on political propaganda of one kind or another (his own or nationalists of the 1880's or even Roman or Greek).
Anyhow, there is plenty of newer research, most of which I had to read for my last year's paper, and most of which falls on the heading of language research, rather than, say, archaeological research, or even religion studies. Someone could actually make a good dent in this subject just by pointing out the falsehoods in the previous research, since so much of it is based on Dumézil. This includes the theory that the Indo-Europeans arrived from the Russian steppes and bowled over all of Europe's population, rendering them all, except for the Basques, extinct. That whole theory is based on Dumézil and a really large circle argument. That thesis basically stands based on the fact that there are not too many people who have come up with anything that's a whole lot better. All those theories are about equal. This one is the only one that's based on a specific political agenda, though.
Anyhow, as you can see, I can go on about this forever...(What topic can't I go on about forever? Duh.)
)
