Status
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Description
For almost a century and a half, Bulfinch's Mythology has been the text by which the great tales of the gods and goddesses, Greek and Roman antiquity; Scandinavian, Celtic, and Oriental fables and myths; and the age of chivalry have been known. The stories are divided into three sections: The Age of Fable or Stories of Gods and Heroes (first published in 1855); The Age of Chivalry (1858), which contains King Arthur and His Knights, The Mabinogeon, and The Knights of English History; and Legends of Charlemagne or Romance of the Middle Ages (1863). For the Greek myths, Bulfinch drew on Ovid and Virgil, and for the sagas of the north, from Mallet's Northern Antiquities. He provides lively versions of the myths of Zeus and Hera, Venus and Adonis, Daphne and Apollo, and their cohorts on Mount Olympus; the love story of Pygmalion and Galatea; the legends of the Trojan War and the epic wanderings of Ulysses and Aeneas; the joys of Valhalla and the furies of Thor; and the tales of Beowulf and Robin Hood. The tales are eminently readable. As Bulfinch wrote, "Without a knowledge of mythology much of the elegant literature of our own language cannot be understood and appreciated. . . . Our book is an attempt to solve this problem, by telling the stories of mythology in such a manner as to make them a source of amusement."… (more)
User reviews
THis book is definitely a must.
This three-volume collection presents Bulfinch's studies first published in one combined volume in 1881: The Age of Fable presents the Greek and Roman myths of the classical period. The Age of Chivalry is a retelling of the legends of King Arthur, Robin Hood, and sundry British/Celtic folk tales. The third part, the Legends of Charlemagne, recounts tales drawn from France, Germany, and Africa.
As I like to include some mythology and mythological stories into my writings, I think
At times this book tries to cover other types of mythology, but briefly. Clearly he cared more about Roman and King Author mythology. Maybe he didn't know too much about the other stuff, but to call this "mythology" is kind of misleading. The third part of this book is more history/lore than mythology. Not sure if Charlemagne truly belongs in this book or not.
Besides the fact that this focuses on mythology the only reason I read this was because it was referenced in the comic book Fables with "Bulfinch" Street. Not only that, I can see Fables used some of this books ideas on knights and chivalry...which this book goes into more than mythology in my opinion.
Overall I'm glad I read this, but most of this was a review thanks to college.
The Age
The second section, The Age of Chivalry, revolves around the stories of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. This section is where the "Abridgement" in the title starts to rear its ugly head. While not as bad as in the following section, this is where the fact that this book was originally a textbook comes out in the storytelling. Unlike the former section, where there were stories like the Iliad but quickly move on to other characters, this section is more or less about the same group of people throughout. This means that while we have these characters for a longer amount of time, we still do not get very much elaboration on their character traits outside of being told that they love people or are virtuous knights. Because we are with these characters for longer, I would expect more elaboration on them. This section also summarises Le Morte d’Arthur (1485), by Sir Thomas Malory, which is also located in the recommended reading of Appendix D of the 5e Dungeon Master's Guide (2014).
In my opinion, the last section, The Legends of Charlemagne, was the hardest to get through, even though it was only around fifty pages. Maybe this is due to the fact that it is around half the length of The Age of Chivalry, or due to the fact that Charlemagne was an actual historical figure, but this section dragged along quite a bit. It was also, especially in chapters four and five, very insistent on a mentality of "us Christians versus those Muslims," which while understandable for the time, was not exactly the most palatable depiction for me, as I am not a Christian.
All in all, this is a great reference book, but I would stick to using it as just that and not reading it cover-to-cover like I did.