Talk:Temple of Artemis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Comments
[edit] Link
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXDB_=compass&_IXFIRST_=1&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXSPFX_=graphical/full/&$+with+all_unique_id_index+is+$=ENC111861&submit-button=summary is the link to the British Museum's objects from the Temple of Artemis, once I figure out how to make a pretty wiki link to a very long http address.
Damnit, just spent the morning creating another Temple of Artemis article, under the impression that it didn't exist. (Empty link from the Seven Wonders page) Curses. I'm going to try and merge, but our formats are quite different, so I think I'll just add entire sections without touching your info. I might move a few sentences or incorporate them, I hope you don't mind. -Phaust
- Dang! that's irritating! I've made a redirect from Artemision and some links at Ephesus. --Wetman 19:44, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Yeeps; unaware of this (although puzzled why this shouldn't have been under Artemision), I may have compounded matters by making a few additional changes, sorry (see next item). — Bill 14:46, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Ptolemy reference
I removed the Ptolemy reference ("Ptolemy, 5"), or actually, commented it out, 'cause (a) it's not enough of a reference — which work of his? — and (b) I couldn't find any reference to the Artemision in those works of his I do have at hand: the Geography, the Optics, the Tetrabiblos. The closest, and I suspect the origin of the vague reference, was a bald listing of Ephesus with its coördinates in the Geography, V.2, but no mention there of the Artemision. I'm quite prepared to stand corrected of course if you guys find the elusive citation. — Bill 14:46, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Bill, thanks for the contribution. However, it appears that you've accidentally copied the text twice at different places, the second copy usually bearing your changes. I will now delete the extra text while keeping the changes you've made. Please check if your changes remain after I edit. Phaust 17:39, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Destruction
I recently visited Selcuk/Ephesus, and saw this. I have one question: How would this marble building have burned down? Granted, it probably would have had many rugs/wooden furniture/decorations that could burn, but how would that destroy the actual building? Many other stone buildings have had large fire (The "Black Church" in Brasov, Romania comes to mind), but the stone part has survived the destruction.
Did the ancient building techniques include something like lead in the mortar which might have melted under a fire's heat? Can anyone offer a good link or explanation on how this would have reduced the building to rubble?
- Unlike buildings made of granite for example, marble buildings burn. Marble is a form of limestone, and limestone burns quite easily: making quicklime, whence the name limestone. In a first stage it cracks into small fragments. You are right of course that something, like furnishings, wood, lead, is needed to get the fire going. — Bill 19:14, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I belive Strabo or Pliny noted that Herostratus set fire to the frame of the temple roof, which was made of wood. Phaust
- Thanks, gents. Those are both very useful! I looked up Calcium Oxide and Calcium Carbonate, and it confirms what Bill said. Virosa 22:44, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-
- Plus our illustration shows the Crusader castle lurking on the hilltop. Ready-dressed stone was always at hand when pagan buildings were quarries for Christians. --Wetman 03:57, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] An Achaemenid temple?
New edit: "...was built around 550 BC at Ephesus (present day Turkey) during the Achaemenid Persian period... How sensible is this? Or is this just Third World Acting Up?--Wetman 07:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
We definitely have a problem somewhere. Because if the temple was started by King Croesus, around 550, it would indeed have been built mostly under Achaemenid satraps and completed around 430 BC. This is not impossible though, since the Persians did not suppress local cults. The other possibility is that it would have been started around 670 BC and completed under the reign of Croesus. Of course, that would be mostly before the Achaemenids became kings of Anšan. --Svartalf 01:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- ...all in an archaic site that predates Hellenes and Persians alike. In style the temple rebuilt under Croesus was Greek. The Greeks identified the "Lady of Ephesus" as Artemis, though we can see that her iconic effigy is not Hellenic. Perhaps the political jurisdiction needs to take a less prominent prersentation. --20:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. There is a definate problem with the incongruity of the beginning date and by whom and the completion date and by whom.... Stevenmitchell 14:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- On a semi-related note, you gents might want to read Aredvi Sura Anahita, who the Greeks "identified" with Artemis (and the Romans with Diana). cf. the section 'In Asia Minor and the Levant', and also note that per Herodotus/Berosus, the Persians didn't have/promote temples prior to Artaxerxes II (crowned c. 400 BC).
- Incidentally, the other Zoroastrian divinity identified with Artemis is Aši (Ashi/Arti) female divinity of "fortune, luck, reward, recompense" (and also of fertility et al). Great pal of Mithra (who the Greeks called Apollo/Helios).
- -- Fullstop 13:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] with many breasts denoting her fertility
Those aren't breasts. They're aurochs' (bulls') testicles. --Fulminouscherub 22:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mary, Mother of Jesus
Interestingly, Mary, mother of Jesus, retired in Ephesus. Thus, even with the passing of the pagan era, Ephesus remains a center of virgin goddess worship. --Fulminouscherub 22:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind quoting some sources please? In France we have some very interesting traditions about Mary Magdalene and the children Jesus begot on her, but I don't go mentioning those in here (well, in relevant articles)--Svartalf 01:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC), because the sources aren't reputable... Actually, I guess that the legend is completely apocryphal, and sprang up because Ephesus was already the worship center for a Great Goddess, whom the Greeks had (in spite of all logic... why did they not make her into a Demeter, of even a Hera?) associated with a virgin deity of theirs. --Svartalf 01:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- I saw her house with my own two eyes. Actually, Among Orthodox Christians, there are two competing traditions about her retirement and tomb, one in Jerusalem and one in Ephesus. Islam (I believe) has only the tradition about Ephesus. In fact, her house in Efes is one of those few places you'll meet both Muslim and Christian pilgrims coming to the same place.
- The most useful sites I found googling were Turkish tourism sites. The religious sites were, as usual, too concerned with proving that God is, in fact, their own private bitch.
- http://www.virtualtourist.com/travel/Middle_East/Turkey/Izmir_Ili/Ephesus-1844014/Things_To_Do-Ephesus-Virgin_Mary_House-BR-1.html
- http://www.kulturturizm.gov.tr/portal/arkeoloji_en.asp?belgeno=5487
- http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/ephesus-church-of-the-virgin.htm
--Fulminouscherub 00:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
this is useless
Although the Roman Diana and the Greek Artemis were perpetual virgins, Cybele, who originated in Anatolia and more closely resembled the goddess of the Ephesian temple, had the title of "Mother of Gods." It may not be coincidental that it was the Council of Ephesus which agreed to give Mary the title of "Mother of God." NRPanikker 03:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Alexander?
I removed a throwaway comment about the chosen location 'emphasising Alexander the Great's vast empire', which is a bizarre statement given that the temple was completed 200 years before he was born and destroyed the same day he was born, years before he had an empire. Ignoring the fact that a temple in Ionia, which had been 'Greek territory' for hundreds of years, hardly impresses the expanse of the newly-won empire from Greece to India. Xander 10:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not true
I moved this here, as it's troubled me from the start: "Like the other wonders, Antipater chose the temple for his list not only because of its beauty or size, but also because it rested near the border of the Greek world. This inspired a sense of mystery and awe for the Greeks." But no: since one of the Wonders was Olympia, this is patently untrue. In Hellenistic times, Ephesus was not peripheral in any sense. Nor were Rhodes or Alexandria. --Wetman 14:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Remains?
One section says nothing remains of the temple and another says a single column is still there -- which is it? Largesock 18:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
- The caption of the self-explanatory illustration reads in part "A column assembled from fragments marks the site"--Wetman (talk) 22:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] All but nothing?
Can someone alter the 'ancient' writing on the page that says "all but nothing remains..." Obviously we all know what it means, but let's strive for some clear and simple writing here at Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.128.18 (talk) 06:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] "Plutarch remarked"
This is incorrect, Plutarch reported a remark; see http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/1547.html 14:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Religious bias
Removing the phrase:
- "The Christians stood out from all contemporaries in their unique approach to gods that were not theirs."
from the Ephesian Artemis section. Lofty anti-Christianity sentiment here, as well as an opinion, passed off as fact, that violates the "original research" clause and is patently untrue to boot. The early Christians (a monotheistic society) may not have been as accepting of other gods as their contemporary friends the Romans (a polytheistic society), but they were far from "unique" in their "approach to gods that were not theirs". Eastern world history much (or for that matter, Judaism)? 76.102.165.45 (talk) 03:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- "The Christian approach was at variance with the tolerant syncretistic approach of pagans to gods who were not theirs" will make a definite, more accurate improvement. Editors who have the courtesy to log in are often taken more seriously. --Wetman (talk) 05:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] "Megabyzi/Megabyzae"
Back on 16 May 2004 I introduced "eunuch priests called megabyzi". Now I think this should have been "eunuch priests, such as the Megabyzus known to Xenophon". Megabyzus (not the Persian general), "sacristan" (in this translation) of the Artemision at Ephesus, returned to Xenophon when he was in exile at Scillos, the gold that had been set aside for the Lady of Ephesus on the shore of the Black Sea, in gratitude for the safe arrival of most of the Ten Thousand (Anabasis 5.3). Xenophon used the gold to buy a plot at Scillus, not far from Olympia, and set it aside for the Lady of Ephesus . Is this the only source of a connection of "Megabyzi" with Ephesus? Should I correct the text taking Megabyzus to be Xenonphon's friend, not a title? --Wetman (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Strabo also mentions eunuch priests called Megabyzoi at the temple of Artemis (Geographica 14.1.23); it seems that you were right. I -think- I remember something about them in Hesychius ("priests of Artemis") as well. 3rdAlcove (talk) 23:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- I just noticed you actually even added "(Strabo 14)"! I guess I'll specify. 3rdAlcove (talk) 23:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)