Talk:Imperial cult
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm afraid that this article is about the historical worship of Roman emperors and has nothing to do with anything your group is concerned about. I am making the weblinks added here not autolinking, and I hope not to find dozens of them elsewhere on Wikipedia. Smerdis of Tlön 04:45, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Rome
I think I'll split off most of the 'Ancient Rome' section to Imperial cult of ancient Rome or something alike, as this article is heavily out of balance now. Any objections?--Hippalus 22:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Done! Imperial cult (Ancient Rome)--Hippalus 08:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Modern practice
I have encountered several accounts in my readings of modern practitioners of this type of cult, including but certainly not limited to, the modern worship of Julius and Augustus Caesar. My question is if this information should be added to this article, due to the fact that the purpose of the article as it currently reads seems to (perhaps inadvertently) focus on Ancient practices. There is the Rastafari section, but before I attempt an edit (and recheck my sources) I wanted to be clear on the article's intention. If modern practice should not be added to this article, what are your thoughts on creating a separate article entitled Modern Practices of Imperial Cults and moving the Rastafari and Japanese information to it. I'm not sure it is necessary to create a seperate article, but I don't want to mangle the purpose of this one. Additionally, do you think a new article as described is even worthy of creation, when a section within this one might suffice? I noticed the creation of Imperial cult (Ancient Rome), but I wonder if that article should be expanded to include all Ancient practices and appropriately renamed? However, the current Imperial cult (Ancient Rome) does seem to warrant its own article IMHO. Perhaps this article would best be reorganized into two main sections, "Ancient Practice" and "Modern Practice". Trippz 08:29, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Euhemerus
Should the Euhemerus reference be included? The way it reads it suggests that Euhemerus himself was worshiped. After reading the article on Euhemerus, I see the point the entry is attempting to make, but it still seems unclear. I almost changed the wording myself to euhemeristic, but I'm not sure that is a word. The information about Euhemerus and his inclusion in the article seems helpful, but its presentation is a little clunky. Trippz 08:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Defining "Imperial Cult"
I just want to open a discussion on the agreed definition of Imperial Cult for purposes of this article. My understanding is that the venerated figure(s) in question must be (or have been) the leader(s) of a politically or geographically recognized nation. The nation in question may not necessarily fit the definition of being an Empire, thus making the use of the word "Imperial" somewhat misleading. For example, Monarchs and Dictators may also have Imperial Cult followers. In fact, it seems to be the autocratic nature of the venerated figure or dynasty which worshipers adhere to most. I'm somewhat confused by the use of "...supranational identity in the case of a multi-ethnic state ..." as mentioned in the article, because this appears to be more like nationalism. Can someone clarify this to me? The two terms seem closely related, but I don't specifically see the distinction. Is it that the nationalistic beliefs are centered exclusively on the autocrat? Trippz 09:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)