I've read the rules and I'm fully aware that questions regarding mythology are not allowed in this site. But the texts and mythological folklore are part of our culture, whether or not they're true, they were passed on to generation by generation for years.

As times passed the stories evolve slowly and in recent times when we see different versions of the same epic is recited, read or studied in different parts of the world.

Can the questions regarding the same evolution of epic tales be discussed, like how a particular version came into being and how a character, story, etc from the particular version is referenced in another text which basically can help us in tracking the history of the evolution of these mythological folklores?

  • 5
    I see no reason why this would be against the rules. – Semaphore Jun 3 '20 at 9:38
  • 4
    Agreed. IMHO, religious texts are legitimate historical sources. So long as the question is about the use of the text in the context and study of history, I don't see a problem. – MCW Jun 3 '20 at 9:56

I think this would be acceptable as long as the question is about the use of the text in the context and study of history, and there is reasonable potential that the question is historically answerable.

Of course, questions should also comply with the other requirements set out in our Help Centre, and more generally with the SE Code of Conduct.

For example, if we don't have any commentaries on the texts, we cannot evaluate their development.

Similarly, if your question is say why a version of Gilgamesh was modified in newer version then that might be difficult to answer without bringing our own opinions in -- unless the new scribe also put down why they modified the text, but the latter should be verifiable, i.e., "Did the scribe reason why they modified Gilgamesh's text from the previous version in the 10th century BC?" as opposed to "Why was the text of Gilgamesh changed over time?".

But, at the same time if the question were to ask "How did contemporary clerics assess the scripture of King James' Bible?" or something along those lines, then I don't see a problem with that -- given there would be an answer that we could research in existence which would be solely focused on the historical development of that text, potentially including the clerics' understanding of the motivations of that text as well.

No doubt the others here can provide a more helpful explanation as to what should pass our collective moderation standards.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .