The Greek Concept of Nature

2 Cosmogonic Myth as an Antecedent to Peri Phuseos Writings

WHAT IS A COSMOGONIC MYTH? What is a “myth”? The word myth is notoriously difficult to define, and no one definition has been universally accepted.1 According to some ethnologists , a myth is a message a social group considers to have received from its ancestors and transmits orally from generation to generation (Calame-Griaule 1970, 23). But a myth is not simply a message in the form of an orally transmitted story. According to Henri Frankfort (1949, 16), “Myth is a form of poetry which transcends poetry in that it proclaims a truth; a form of reasoning which transcends reasoning in that it wants to bring about the truth it proclaims ; a form of action, of ritual behaviour, which does not find its fulfilment in the act but must proclaim and elaborate a poetic form of truth.” Myth exists in an intimate relationship with ritual—with the repetition of demonstrative acts perceived as having been performed at the beginning of time by gods or ancestors (Eliade 1965, 22; Burket 1985, 8; Nagy 1990, 10). In reciting and reenacting myths, people relive the time of origins. Indeed, they leave “chronological” time and return to primordial time, that is, the time when the event took place for the first time. In reliving this time, they experience spectacles of divine works and relearn (and even master) the creative lessons of supernatural beings (Eliade 1965, 30). As Eliade notes (1963, 14), people consider their myths to be true stories that relate how something real came into existence. But in addition, because myth “wants to bring about the truth it proclaims,” events that occurred ab origine are reenacted in ritual. Myth thus provides both an explanation for the present social and natural order and a guarantee that the present order of 37 2 Cosmogonic Myth as an Antecedent to Peri Phuseo\s Writings nature and society will remain as they are. This dual aspect of explanation and guarantee is especially characteristic of cosmogonical myths. A cosmogonical myth is a traditional explanation about how (and why) the world order originated.2 To the extent that a myth of origin always recounts a “creation”—how an object came to be—strictly speaking, the cosmogonic myth enjoys particular prestige. Since the origin of the world precedes all other origins—the creation of humanity or society presupposes the existence of the world—the cosmogonic myth is the exemplary model for all species of creation (Eliade 1965, 25; Burkert 1992, 125). This does not mean that an origin myth imitates or copies the cosmogonic model, but simply that any “new” situation completes the initial totality, that is, the world. In other words, each subsequent “creation” always implies an antecedent state that, in the final analysis, is the world (Eliade 1963, 52). This is why the origin myths of events as diverse as death, sickness, or a people briefly recall the essential moments of the world’s creation. It is as if the power of myths of origin depended on the rudiments of cosmogony (Eliade 1965, 102–103; Burkert 1992, 125). What interests me in particular here is the aspect of myth that guarantees the present state of things, the world in which a given social group resides, will remain as it is. This is precisely the aim of the mythico-ritual scenario of the periodic renewal of the world.3 This ritual appears to have had two distinct origins: the cosmogonic scenario of a New Year, on the one hand, and the consecration of the king, on the other. The cosmogonic scenario originates from the idea that the cosmos is menaced with ruin if it is not recreated annually, and the consecration of the king is associated with the harvest, which assures the continuity of the life of the entire community. In the mystical rebirth of the king as the Cosmocrator, the two ideas merge into a single ritual.4 Since the king had to renew the entire cosmos, and since the renewal par excellence occurred when one inaugurated a new temporal cycle, the ritual consecration of the king was celebrated at New Year’s celebrations. The king was perceived as the son and earthly representative of the divinity. As such, he was responsible for the regularity of the rhythms of nature and for the general well-being of society. The king guaranteed the permanence of the universal order advocated by the divinity in the beginning. As Frankfort notes: “The ancients . . . saw man always as part of society, and society...