I read Norman O. Brown’s Hermes the Thief: The Evolution of a Myth (1947) which traces the evolution of the Hermes God image over time throughout ancient Greece, tying its evolution (from cattle-thief and trickster to musician to herald, messenger, patron of commerce, and psychopomp guiding souls to the underworld) to changing political, cultural, and economic realities. It is a tightly argued, dispassionate, and academic book, and it is strong, written when he was only 34 (showing how far modern academia has fallen); I was surprised to see Brown’s Wiki entry state that the book showed a “Marxist tendency”: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N…
This language is sloppy, but the reason the Wiki states it showed a “Marxist tendency” was that it attributed evolution of Hermes to its socio-economic conditions. To me, this is such an obvious and necessary line of argument that I was flabbergasted that it would arouse controversy, but during the Cold War the linking of Gods to material realities was considered controversial. That I was surprised by it and thought it such an obvious line of argument shows conclusively which side was the winner here, becoming a background accepted condition in subsequent decades.
Now, Brown did in his later works become an outright Marxist, abandoning the restraint and academic focus that constitutes his Hermes work. I don’t feel compelled to follow him there, but this early work stands on its own merits, and it is excellent.
amazon.com/Hermes-Thief…