ABSTRACT
Of the potential pitfalls into which a student of Near Eastern myths fall, two stand out. The first is the adoption of what one might fairly call a classic functionalist mode of analysis. The second is the assumption that there is a one-for-one correspondence between the social background of a mythical narrative and the empirical institutions of the society which produced the myth. A myth as a charter for a particular social institution meets the presumptive need for such a charter most indirectly, if not obscurely, and at an expenee far in excess of a simple statement that some social institution is in fact desirable. Functionalism as a method of explanation the problem of what one might call, with some understatement, a lack of economy. Jacobsen's reconstruction of prehistoric Mesopotamia, including this notion of primitive democracy, continues to receive widespread support, most especially among biblical scholars. Many students of Near Eastern myths plainly remain embedded in that age.
