Firstly, we should know the definition of myth and archetype. Everyone has their own definition about everything. There are main ideas about myth, traditionally, myth is a set of stories, traditions, or beliefs associated with a particular group or the history of an event. From some famous writers, they give us a clear and brief definition. An American writer, novelist and critic, Mark Schorer,” Myth is a fundamental, the dramatic representation of our deepest instinctual life, of a primary awareness of man in the universe, capable of many configurations, upon which al particular opinions and attitude depends.” Alan W.Watts, a writer, philosopher, speaker and expert in comparative religion, says” Myth is to be defined as a complex of stories-some no doubt fact, and some fantasy-which for various reasons, human beings regard as demonstrations of the inner meaning of the universe and of human life.” Also, there are some definitions of archetype; it is an original model or type after which other similar things are patterned. Archetypal motifs and images that tend to elicit comparable psychological responses and serve similar cultural functions. We call them universal symbols that symbols are those which carry the same or very similar meanings for a large portion, if not all, of mankind. An archetype is a generic, idealized model of a person, object or concept from which similar instances are derived, copied, patterned or emulated. In psychology, an archetype is a model of a person, personality or behavior. Next, we can generally understand the meaning of mythological and archetypal approaches on the basis of the definition of myth and archetype. Obviously, the myth critic is concerned to seek out those mysterious elements that inform certain literary works and that elicit, with almost uncanny force, dramatic and universal human reactions. Lastly, the myth critic wishes to discover how certain works of literature, usually those that have become, or promise to become, “classics,” image a kind of reality to which readers give perennial response while other works, seemingly as well constructed, and even some forms of reality, leave them cold. Speaking figuratively, the myth critic studies in depth the “wooden hawks” of great literature: the so-called archetypes or archetypal patterns that the writer has drawn forward along the tensed structural wires of his or her masterpiece and that vibrate in such a way that a sympathetic resonance is set off deep within the reader. Mythology tends to be speculative and philosophical; its affinities are with religion, anthropology, and cultural history.