Talk:Theseus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greece Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Theseus, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Mid This article has been rated as a Mid priority article

Contents

[edit] Clarification Request

"Theseus subsequently built a deme in her honor."

  • What is meant by "deme" isn't clear. Can someone clarify this, or perhaps edit the linked article to clarify the meaning? --Kerowyn 08:22, 19 September 2005 (UTC)


Answer: Deme=Demos (municipality), ie city. Jaqvaar, 17th Jan 2008

I doubt the correctness of the Greek spelling, with υ rather than ο as the second-to-last letter. Where did it come from? -- Mike Hardy

  • Probably from Shakespeare. In A Midsummer Night's Dream Theseus is spelled with the "u." This might be the first widely distributed instance of the name in English. Just my own theory thoug. --Kerowyn 08:22, 19 September 2005 (UTC)


Answer:The spelling in Ancient Greek was θησευς, so the U is just a transliteration of the Greek υ (which is actually both a U and a Y in modern English). The ancient Greek pronunciation was close to "theseus" whereas more modern versions sounded like "thesefs" (e+u in modern Greek is pronounced as "ef" or "ev"). The modern Greek name of this hero however (after 1981) is "Θησέας" (pronounced "Thiseas"). There was no instance anywhere throughout Greek history where the particular hero was written as "thiseos" (though the genitive form of the name is Θησεως with Ω).

As for Mike Hardy's point: this is true about modern Greek names (Nikos, Giorgos, etc), but Theseus is older than Athens itself, the name being at least 3000 years old (and perhaps even 4000). Names ending in -eus were common in those days. Similarly, modern names ending in -is, such as Kostis, derive from a double E sound (EE) which, at some point in Classical times, was turnned into the letter H (ΗΡΑΚΛΗΣ=EERAKLEES, ie the hero Hercules). Something similar happened to English with the two Us, even today known as "double-U" and written "W". One might also like to compare the usage of U and O in modern Arabic (written with the same letter). One theory states that ancient Greek in its original form sounded a lot like that.

Steve Jaqvaar

http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/Theseus.html has the previous spelling (with the υ). I too am confused, but this is consistent with the English spelling (υ is typically transliterated to 'u', whereas ο is typically transliterated to 'o'. cf. αυτο -> "auto", etc. So if the Greek had an ο, one would expect the English spelling to be "Theseos," which it is not.). Changing back until we get some contradictory sources saying otherwise. Delirium 00:43 Jan 8, 2003 (UTC)

You're mistaken about one thing: Most masculine Greek names ending with "omicron sigma" get transliterated so that they end with "us", because they got Latinized before they got transliterated. But a bit of web searching now makes me think upsilon was right. -- Mike Hardy

Wait .... I should have said they got Latinized when they got transliterated. The Romans transliterated them and adapted them to their own language by putting "-VS" where "-ΟΣ" had appeared in Greek. Then we inherited the Latin spellings. -- Mike Hardy

The first sentence of this article says Theseus was king of Athens. It seems to me that could be historical, or legendary, or mythological, or some mixture of those three. Could that be clarified in the first sentence? Michael Hardy 18:58 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I believe mythological/legendary, but probably based on a historical figure. In some quick googling I wasn't able to discern whether there's good evidence for his being historical or not, so can't say for sure. Any classicists around here? --Delirium 01:22 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)


[edit] Theseus and Amazons

Theseus defeated Amazons (really, an Hittite invasion) at Areopagus, in Athens, in second half of 2nd millennium BC. This event was of respective rank of Persian invasion of Dates (490 BC). This event did his name deathless. Later, he was reputed to be an hero (or sometimes, an hemigod).

--IonnKorr 20:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

That is complete original research, as well as unsupported nonsense. Hittite invasion theories are considered fringe, not mainstream, and theseus' historicity is generally regarded as extremely unlikely. --Victim of signature fascism 18:54, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Ball of Twine

I was under the impression (probably from Graves' _The Greek Myths_) that the ball of twine that Ariadne gave Theseus was actually to help him find the Minotaur's lair, and not to find his way out. That was the secret of the lair -- that the ball would continue to roll downhill. Does anyone else remember reading this? My copy of Graves is in another city right now :P. Chaleur 20:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

In The Greek Myths, section 98 Graves does give the impression that the ball is rolling of itself; his sources are Plutarch, Life of Theseus and Pseudo-Apollodorus, Epitome of the Bibliotheke, which has this text: "Following his instructions, she gave Theseus a ball of thread as he entered. He fastened this to the door and let it trail behind him as he went in. He came across the Minotauros in the furthest section of the labyrinth, killed him with jabs of his fist, and then made his way out again by pulling himself along the thread." In all the myths it is the winding and unwinding of the thread that is mentioned. What would be downhill one way is not the other.--Wetman 21:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong number?

In the section about the minotaur is says THeseus and the 14 children returned safely but earlier in the passage it says that THeseus took the place of one of the people to be sacrificed so it should be 13 children can someone please edit it because for some reason my pc wont let me edit it it will only let me post on tlk pages

[edit] Explaining 'relevance'

The following formerly listed items are here because they are not relevant. This means that they do not enrich or clarify the reader's understanding of the subject, which is Theseus. As the list is added to, as doubtless it will be, please give specific reasons for irrelevance in italics, for the young folk. (Wetman 23:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)):

  • Theseus's battle with the Minotaur was adapted into an episode of Ulysses 31.
What use was made of the myth? What does this tell about the modern idea of Theseus? Why is this relevant?
What use was made of the myth? What does this tell about the modern idea of Theseus? Why is this relevant?
  • In the animated television series Class of the Titans, the character Theresa is descended from Theseus.
Aside from the ignorant folk etymology mislinking Theresa and Theseus, likely to confuse the Wikipedia reader as much as the poster of this factoid, this is irrelevant to the subject, which is Theseus.
  • Theseus was featured as a boss in the video game God of War II. In it, the main character, Kratos, meets an aged Theseus on the Island of Creation. Theseus at that time is working for The Sisters of Fate as the Horse Keeper. Knowing that Kratos wishes to force the aid of the sisters, he decides to fight Kratos, using his spear and a mastery of Ice magic. He is then murdered for standing in Kratos' way. Somewhat ironically, Theseus calls upon Minotaurs to help him fight Kratos.
Only the name "Theseus" has been employed in this muddled invention, which is likely to confuse the Wikipedia reader as much as the poster. There is no 'irony' in misundertstandings of 'Minotaurs' [sic] and no genuine link to the subject of this article.

[edit] Phaedra and Hippolytus

Phaedra is identified as Theseus' first wife, but in other pages is his second wife. Also, her being his first wife contradicts facts presented immediately following. If he was his first wife, how could she fall in love with Theseus' son from another wife, while her sons are still in infancy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.0.37.194 (talk) 15:18, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Antiope was Theseus' first wife by most accounts. —417 「話」 15:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A zany edit to Theseus

(Copied from User talk:Wetman)

A new edit has been submitted to this article. External links were removed. The edit presents a new, well articulated argument that goes against traditional views. Kirkus, one of the most respected national review organizations finds it "intriguing" yet you find it an amateur's blurb and you delete it. Some online publications carry it on their news page, yet you do not want it included in Wikipedia. At any rate, the external link issue is a valid one. I will consider a needed external link under the External Link category. If you have something positive to contribute, please do and leave the amateur blurbs for a different category.Geosop (talk) 07:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

George Sopasakis opened an account, as New User:Geosop, 23 December 2007 with the apparent purpose of entering a puff of his own decidedly quirky self-published "book" linking Theseus, Gilgamesh, the Egyptian Book of the Dead and... Jesus!——with a link to a website offering his book for sale. I reverted the edit. His User Contributions sufficiently tell the story. A look at WP:COI explains why this material is a conflict of interest, as well as being not acceptably encyclopedic. The edit has been reverted a second time. These posts have been copied to Talk:Theseus where they would be pursued, if that were necessary. --Wetman (talk) 08:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

From WP:COI: Revealing the names of pseudonymous editors is in all cases against basic policy. Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as Wikipedia policies are closely adhered to. The imputation of conflict of interest is not by itself a good reason to remove sound material from articles. Closeness to a subject does not mean you're incapable of being neutral. From WP: Fringe theories: If the idea is notable in some other way such as coverage in the media, the idea may still be included in articles devoted to the idea itself or non-scientific contexts. If a notable fringe theory is primarily described by amateurs and self-published texts, verifiable and reliable criticism of the fringe theory need not be published in a peer reviewed journal.
Additional comments: Obviously I am new to this community. After my first edit to Theseus, a fellow Wikipedian (not Wetman) alerted me to inappropriate inclusion of external links. By paying closer attention to the rules, his point became clear. I corrected my mistake and re-edited my contribution, removing my two external links to a Press Release and the author’s book site. However, I was required to source my edit in a verifiable and neutral sense. I used the suggested ISBN number method of reference instead of the source book website. As the primary focus of my edit was the listing of an interesting notable idea and not the book itself, I considered the future listing of a related press release or other third party media site (under the external link category). I promptly alerted both Wikipedians who objected to my first edit about this second edit and asked for possible contributions as I am new to this community and the nerves are obviously frail. Unfortunately, if you notice Wetman’s answer, you will detect words such as zany, puff, quirky, “book”. In addition is obvious that he has a content dispute ( and… Jesus!). His bias is evident in his vocabulary of choice yet he acted appropriately when he listed this argument in the Theseus talk page, a move I should have initiated beforehand. From WP:COI: Avoid using … judgmental terms — this is accusatory and discouraging. It is not helpful, nor reason to delete an article. Do not use conflict of interest as an excuse to gain the upper hand in a content dispute.
I would appreciate your constructive input, but please leave all unwelcomed personal attacks at the door. Such tactics distract and discredit you and your arguments while often are indicative of immaturity and faulty reasoning. I wish to add back to Theseus this second edit deleted by Wetman:

 Theseus, Gilgamesh and Jesus

A new theory emerged in 2007, connecting Theseus to Gilgamesh of Uruk and the biblical Jesus. These three pivotal stories from antiquity are found to share the very same substructure.
The Thread of Ariadne (The TOA) ISBN 978-1-59526-826-6, a book by George Sopasakis, demonstrates a curious alignment of Theseus and the Minotaur with the older Epic of Gilgamesh and the younger story of Jesus of Nazareth. Geosop (talk) 03:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly support Wetman's deletion of the material as COI and unencyclopedic. Ford MF (talk) 06:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
No one logs on at Wikipedia explicitly to sell their own book, whether under a transparent pseudonym— as in this case— nor under a cloak of anonymity either: it just isn't done. A blurb is a blurb: no personal attack has been made, ignoring assertions of my immaturity and faulty reasoning yada yada yada. A thesis that is sound often does not require a vanity publisher. This "thesis" has not "emerged" save in this attempt on Wikipedia, where not every passing fringe theory gets promoted. User:Geosop needs to be discouraged from attempts at manipulating Wikipedia's rules of fair play. --Wetman (talk) 14:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)