 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |  |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PREVIOUS CHAPTER - NEXT CHAPTER - HELP - GR VIDEOS - GR YOUTUBE - TWITTER - SD1 YOUTUBE  FROM THE DEAD SEA LEGENDS TO COMPARATIVE MYTHOLOGY
— Growth of myths to account for remarkable appearances in Nature — mountains. rocks, curiously marked stones, fossils, products of volcanic action — Myths of the transformation of living beings into natural objects — Development of the science of Comparative Mythology — Description of the Dead Sea — Impression made by its peculiar features on the early dwellers in Palestine — Reasons for selecting the Dead Sea myths for study — Naturalness of the growth of legend regarding the salt region of Usdum — Universal belief in these legends — Concurrent testimony of early and mediaeval writers, Jewish and Christian, respecting the existence of Lot’s wife as a “pillar of salt,” and of the other wonders of the Dead Sea — Discrepancies in the various accounts and theological explanations of them — Theological arguments respecting the statue of Lot’s wife — Growth of the legend in the sixteenth century — Popularization of the older legends at the Reformation — Growth of new myths among scholars — Signs of scepticism among travelers near the end of the sixteenth century — Effort of Quaresmio to check this tendency — Of Eugene Roger — Of Wedelius — Influence of these teachings — Renewed scepticism — the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries — Efforts of Briemle and Masius in support of the old myths — Their influence — The travels of Mariti and of Volney — Influence of scientific thought on the Dead Sea legends during the eighteenth century — Reactionary efforts of Chateaubriand — Investigations of the naturalist Seetzen — Of Dr. Robinson — The expedition of Lieutenant Lynch — The investigations of De Saulcy — Of the Duc de Luynes. — Lartet’s report — Summary of the investigations of the nineteenth century. — Ritter’s verdict — Attempts to reconcile scientific facts with the Dead Sea legends — Van de Velde’s investigations of the Dead Sea region — Canon Tristram’s — Mgr. Mislin’s protests against the growing rationalism — The work of Schaff and Osborn — Acceptance of the scientific view by leaders in the Church — Dr. Geikie’s ascription of the myths to the Arabs — Mgr. Haussmann de Wandelburg and his rejection of the scientific view — Service of theologians to religion in accepting the conclusions of silence in this field GOTO NEXT CHAPTER - SCIENCE VS. THEOLOGY INDEX & SEARCH
 |
