Talk:Triple Goddess
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Mythology WikiProject.
This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Contents |
[edit] Appropriateness
There probably ought to be some mention of the Norns as well as Clotho, Lachesis, and Atropos. But, this is outside of my field of expertise, so I'll leave it to others. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:17, May 24, 2004 (UTC)
- Actually, I thought the use of Persephone, Demeter, and Hecate were wholly inappropriate examples for the triple goddess, especially the 'maid, mother, crone' version. The Greek Fates (Clotho, Lachesis, and Atropos) would be a far better example. Especially since their actions dictate the times of life: Clotho spinning, Lachesis measuring, and Atropos cutting. Birth, experience, death. Not that Demeter, Hecate, and Persephone aren't all groovy goddesses. They are- but they are not exactly a trifecta. Especially given Persephone's association with the dead (kind of ironic for a spring goddess, huh?). acadian_sidhe --68.11.145.140 02:10, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
-
- Also, Hecate wasn't generally depicted as a crone, but as a beautiful women (or often three beautiful women). Also, the implication that Gaia had three aspects and was synonymous with the Roman Magna Mater sounds dodgy to me. Basically, I think the article would benefit from taking a wider viewpoint. There are many examples of single goddesses becoming three (but sometimes 9 or 11 or 12, etc), such as with the Celtic Matronae, Hecate, the "Mothers" of Engyon, Brigid, etc. In some of these cases the three even fit the mold of maiden, mother and crone. All this should be mentioned, clearly indicating what is modern interpretation and what is historical. However just saying that they are Persephone, Demeter and Hecate and are all aspects of Gaia is somewhat limiting and seems incorrect. I don't really feel like rewriting this article myself right now, but I may do eventually... Fuzzypeg 13:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- The norns may be a triad, as are the Charites, but no myth connects them with an aspect of a Triple Goddess, unless they were a triplicate of Hecate. A good starting text to clear the mind might be Kerenyi, Eleusis: Archetypal Image of Mother and Daughter which discusses the Eleusinian mysteries that revolve around Demeter and Persephone, rather than any Triple Goddess. Gaia is simply one aspect: the fruitful Mother. Gaia is neither Maiden nor Crone. --Wetman 23:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- My point was that the article, since it's called "Triple Goddess", should discuss the phenomenon of triple goddesses (which were quite common; more so than, say, triple gods). Whether or not they fit to Graves' conception of the Triple Goddess, or the neopagan conception, or whatever, is another matter, and that can be discussed too.
- By the way, I think you'd be hard pressed to establish the Norns (Scandinavian) as being aspects of Hecate (Greek). I specifically didn't include the Norns in my comment above because there's not such clear evidence for them being aspects of a single goddess. Fuzzypeg 11:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Wicca & neopaganism
Now that I really read it, this is an incredibly poorly-crafted page. It talks very little about the triple goddesses and their differences and similarities across cultures, but a whole lot about neopagan beliefs concerning triple goddesses. Not that that doesn't have its place, but I don't think that place should have been laced throughout the article. This is not an editorial, and it's certainly not an article about Neopaganism in general or Dianic and Wiccan views. It's misleading. acadian_sidhe--68.11.145.140 02:18, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
- I agree. At the very least, there should be a clear distinction between triads of female figures in general (quite common in Roman, Celtic and Norse mythology), and the "Maiden/Mother/Crone" arrangement, which seems to be a more recent invention (Robert Graves? Jane Harrison?) —Ashley Y 04:26, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, the Wiccan MMC triple Goddess derives from Graves. Unfortunately many people believe that this concept was widespread in antiquity and attempt to 'back port' it onto discussions of history. As with other wikipedia articles, the Wiccan material should be clearly marked in its own section. Its valid, relevant, and modern; this should be made clear from the article. --Nantonos 19:51, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Graves himself was not any kind of Wiccan, nor do I think that those who are partially inspired by Graves are all Wiccans, so Graves should not be relegated to a "Wiccan" section of the article. AnonMoos 17:41, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Women in paganism
I don't have much academic experience in religion, but I'm checking up on Dan Brown's suggestion that in the sweeping of Christianity over Paganism, women ultimately lost their cultural standing. Can anyone point me in the direction of more information on women in paganism? Thanks.
- The first volume of Paul Veyne, editor, A History of Private Life will give you plenty of material and a bibliography. It's available in paperback. --Wetman 13:55, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Layout
Cheesy-looking layout now. --Wetman 13:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wicca template
I have reservations about adding the {{wicca}} template to this page, since the Triple Goddess concept wasn't invented by Wiccans, is not currently embraced exclusively by Wiccans, and is not really a basic core Wiccan belief (from what I can tell). It's really more of a general eclectic neopagan thing, rather than a specifically Wiccan thing. Furthermore, the {{wicca}} template is big, loud, and annoying, and interacts in an unfortunate way with the placement of the images along the side of the page. I'm removing the template at least until the technical issues can be resolved... AnonMoos 17:24, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with this analysis, and support removing the {{wicca}} template for all the reasons that you give. --Nantonos 21:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. I'll place further comments elsewhere on this page. Fuzzypeg 13:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
But if someone were to write a subsection on "the Triple Goddess in Wicca", that would be helpful... AnonMoos 07:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Main three crescents symbol
Do you know for a fact that it originated among Wiccans? AnonMoos 06:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- No I don't, and I'm quite likely wrong. I was attempting a rearrangement of the article that gave a broader view of the triple-goddess phenomenon and wasn't linked solely to the maiden-mother-crone aspects. Particularly, I was trying to give context/origins to some of the different ideas and symbols. It looks like in the process I've antagonised someone into doing some really excellent work on the article.
- I'm not myself a proponent of the view that Graves made it all up (I think he was brilliant and insightful); I just didn't feel qualified myself to rewrite those assertions. I'm really pleased someone else has come forward with so much good info... Fuzzypeg 04:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- OK, it's just that there were a lot of cross-currents in pre-1960's esotericism / occultism / neo-paganism, and I don't think that organized institutionalized "Wiccanism" achieved great prominence until the 1960's. Graves didn't actually "invent" the basic idea, but he greatly popularized one interpretation of it... AnonMoos 15:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
One of the biggest mistakes that the modern NeoPagans make in their interpretation of the aspects is the assumption that the triad of the Goddess relates to the three ages of mortal woman rather than to the universal experience of all living creatures to the three life-thresholds of birth:love:death. The order of the triad should be as Graves described and which is borne out by early Hindu scriptures such as the Puranas : white goddess of creation, red goddess of preservation, black goddess of destruction, hence the later patriarchal Trimurti of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.
- I'm very impressed with what you've added to the page. It's nice to find someone who will actually go to the effort of writing about what they know, especially someone who can draw on detailed information and original sources. The article may need some structural work soon, given the amount of new material that's arriving. I've just reformatted the blockquotes and I'd like to try to set up the references properly as footnotes, so they link to a specific place in the text. I'll start attempting that now, if I can figure out what the different references refer to. Great work! Fuzzypeg 06:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lengthy quotation/copyvio
The lengthy quotation from "The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation: Including the Demotic Spells : Texts". may be problematic as a copyvio. I would suggest to either reduce it in size considerably or to remove it if that is not possible. See Wikipedia:Copyright. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 01:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
The use of a fully attributed quote in this context is "fair use" as it would be if the same quotation was used in a book. The editing of the block quote into smaller chunks was done skillfully and it should be left now as it is. It is not a copyright violation.
There are enough complaints regarding some of the statements made on this page being unsupported by fact. What could be more "factual" than a direct quote from a primary source.
Re: the removal of the Robert Graves link. It should stay. The Robert Graves forum also contains threads which explore the symbolism of the Triple Goddess in a deeper way than is possible within the scope of Wikipedia. Robert Graves is mentioned in more than one place in this text and is relevant to the discussion. In one of the forums there is an interesting thread about the survival of Triple Goddess symbolism in the ceremonies of the Greek Orthodox Church.
St. Sophia and St. Sapienta are another case in point. Both were credited with being the mother of the Three Graces : Faith, Hope and Charity ("Love") and both have separated Feast Days. (That of St. Sapienta is in fact, 1st August). The Greek name for the Three Graces was the Charites ("Graces").
The early Church needed a way to continue to honour the Gnostic Goddess, Sophia/Sapienta ("Wisdom") and making her into a saint was the only viable option.
[edit] CITATIONS
Please advise which form of citations would be acceptable. Fully attributed quotations from academic sources can be supplied with publication details, page numbers and ISBNs if need be.
- Wikipedia allows various types of citation, and doesn't insist on any one variety, although it does suggest consistency. See WP:CITE. However as long as you provide some citation, no-one's going to insist that it be posted first-off in a perfect format. If they think they can improve it, they will. Many articles use footnote-style citations, which I rather like. To insert a footnote, at the point in your text you want the little number to appear you put <ref>whatever text you want to appear in the footnote</ref>. I don't completely like the way it makes the code difficult to read, but it works well in the final article. As long as we get the author, title, year, publisher and page numbers, that's the main thing. You can also look at how some of the other footnotes have been formatted. Fuzzypeg☻ 14:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Abrahamic Religion
The existence of monotheism prior to the Mosaic reform of Judaism is seriously in doubt among scholars do not have an orthodox religious agenda.
The major rewriting of the Hebrew Scriptures and the introduction of the Book of Deuteronomy by King Josiah (which basically centralised both spiritual and political power into the King and the Temple at Jerusalem while disenfranchising all other temples and shrines - including Shiloh) and the continued tradition of the consort of Adonai throughout the period of the monarchy mean that at best we can attribute monotheism (like the name YHWH) to the time of Moses.
See : * The tribes of Yahweh 1250-1050 B.C.E. by Norman K. Gottwald. * Sarah The Priestess : The First Matriarch Of Genesis by Savina Teubal * Canaanites and Their Land, The Tradition of the Canaanites by Niels Peter Lemche
It's is much safer to say "monotheistic" religion than to use the term Abrahamic religion as some of the names of the tribes of Israel are now known to be West Semitic (Ugaritic, Amorite and Canaanite) communities.
The separation of the cultures is post-Exodus similar to the sectarian divisions which occured in Northern Ireland between the returning Irish people who had been living in Scotland and the Irish people who had never left their own country. Racially, linguistically, culturally and religiously there seem to be few real differences between the Canaanite and Hebrew elements of the population until the time of religious reforms. Archaeology also supports evidence for a mixed community rather than separatism.
This was always skillfully hidden by the Biblical editors and the religious reformers by referring to anything traditional and pre-Mosaic as "foreign" or "Hamitic". Evidence from the Book of Jeremiah (which was contemporary with the reign of King Josiah) shows that the Jewish population continued to regard their offerings to the Queen of Heaven as part of their ancient heritage. In fact, at the time, there was still a thriving temple to YHWH in Egypt which was only closed down after the reforms of Josiah.
Until the name of YHWH was used by Moses, the Hebrew God and the Canaanite Father God had the same name, and both were associated with Asherah. In actual fact it went a lot deeper than that, the only difference between the ancient Canaanite and Hebrew languages was the inclusion of more Hamitic loan-words in Hebrew via Ancient Egyptian. Hebrew as a written language did not even exist until the "Exodus".
The very earliest evidence for the Proto-Sinaitic alphabet is found near the shrine of the Goddess Hathor on Mount Sinai (which was a thriving mining community at the time producing turquoise and malachite). The ancient Egyptian placename for Sinai was "Bia" (the Mines).
The first evidence for the alphabet is written on the base of a a small red sphinx dedicated to Hathor with a bilingual inscription in hieroglyphs and proto-Sinaitic.
The inscription reads : "To Hathor, the Mistress of Turquoise" while the proto-Sinaitic inscription reads "To the Lady [Baalat]".
- [http://fontes.lstc.edu/~rklein/images/serabit.jpg "To Hathor, the Mistress of Turquoise".
For a closeup of the actual inscription see Middle Bronze Age Alphabets.
For this reason I have changed the reference from "Abrahamic" to "monotheistic". Even early pre-Islamic traditions attribute the founding of the shrine in Arabia to Abraham "in honour of al-Uzza". If Abrahamic religion was monotheistic it was not monotheistic is the sense that we would interpret it.
- Could we use the term "Hebrew monotheism" or something similar? My concern is that the article implies that monotheism was a new invention from a certain time and never existed previous to that. Now I'm sure that's going to be controversial. You seem to have replies prepared for those who would argue, however I think this is the wrong place to try to support that case, since it would involve importing all of the above discussion, plus quite a bit more, into the article, and having a lengthy section about the history of monotheism. Surely this is better discussed in the Monotheism article. The term "Hebrew monotheism", on the other hand, involves no such implied claim, and also provides better specific context.
- If you really want to say that monotheism was a new innovation that never existed before a certain time, I think it should be said as a direct statement (rather than implied) and have supporting evidence or sources cited. Fuzzypeg☻ 01:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Neopaganism
I do not think that any article which covers archaeology, anthropology and surviving non-monotheistic traditions deserves to be classified under the heading of "neopagan" or co-opted by the WikiProject Neopaganism project. Most practising Hindus would heartily object if their religious traditions were classifed in this way. It could even be classed as a form of some form of imperialism or racism.
Please leave the topics which have historical merit out of the Neopagan loop.
It should not be necessary for any Wikipedia Project to lay claim to the work of others who may not agree with their philosophies or religious practices. The American Neopagan movement has also managed to offend the Native American communities by laying claim to their traditions while ignoring their voice.
- I've seen this same argument regarding other Wikiprojects. I don't really know how these projects are organised, but I do know that if an article is part of a project it only means the article is of interest and importance to that group, not that the article has exclusive relation to that group.
- I don't particularly like the term neopagan either, and I prefer to disassociate myself from it. However all that tag means is that a group of people have seen work was needed, and put the article on their todo list. It doesn't claim ownership, authorship or exclusive association. Fuzzypeg☻ 01:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I'm new to all this. I don't like the word "neopagan" either. It reminds me of "neoprene" something slippery and plastic. I have just clarified what the original author was probably trying to indicate regarding the primacy of Goddess-worship before the time of patriarchal monotheistic religions. I don't think that Abrahamic religions was a broad enough term because it ignores Zoroastrianism which also tried (and failed) to suppress earlier Goddess-traditions. If I had made a mistake in doing this please feel free to correct it.
20:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Zelda
Tri-forcey!
- Yeees. *pats you on the head* I'm sure. Disinclination 03:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
