Talk:Dionysus

Headline text

This, is awkward surrogate-fatherhood motif is an attempt to explain his being called "the twice-born" without invoking the mystery of a life-death-rebirth deity.

I removed this sentence for a couple of reasons. First, it presents hypothesis as fact. There could be a number of alternative reasons why the "surrogate-fatherhood motif" is so "awkward": for example, to reconcile differing local traditions. Second, the l-d-r-d thing is already mentioned twice: in ==Modern Interpretations== and in Categories. Bacchiad 20:00, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Dionysus painting

...too gay... surely you could have found another way to phrase that. - Montréalais 18:38, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Surely I could have. Alexander 007 04:46, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• • If I recall correctly, Dionysus was involved in some homosexual activity, so too gay is not a problem. CanadianCaesar 21:54, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't care for the image either. It's atypical. It would be nice if the first image on the page was helpful to the reader in identifying other images of Dionysus, and this one isn't. Jkelly 03:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Well seeing as part of the point of Dionysus was that he was ambiguously both masculine and feminine (long haired in feminine style dress) I think commenting that he's "too gay" - at least in what I presume your narrow minded view of "too gay" to be - is a bit obtuse. However that said a greek depiction would probably be a good idea. Orias 09:43, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I placed a new image. Classical. Hits the tone. Alexander 007 23:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

It's also very similar to another image, further down the page. I prefer the prior image. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 23:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't. Let's have a vote. I'd rather remove the image further down. Alexander 007 23:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The one you added is in poor focus as well. I welcome a vote. In the meantime, let's revert the article so folks can make an informed decision. I'll trust you to do so in good faith. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 23:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The one you prefer sucks :-) Who the fuck made that previous image king? It's been at the top of the article long enough. Alexander 007 00:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not reverting anything. The best solution may be to find a new image. Alexander 007 00:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Consensus was for the prior image, so I'd hope you'd do so out of respect for that. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 00:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

What consensus? Jkelly didn't like it much either. That Renaissance painting is rather atypical: "Okay, that's a nice take on Dionysus. Looks like an Italian kid. Now where's the image of Dionysus?" Alexander 007 00:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

If you're proposing a new image, you should leave the version intact where it is, and provide a diff. That way, you demonstrate that you are trying to improve the article with your (duplicative, out-of-focus) replacement of the image you described as 'too gay'. That would go a long way towards demonstrating that you are acting in good faith. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 00:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Which one does it look like? The other ones have beards, while the beardless one at the bottom is Hermes. Alexander 007 00:36, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It looks like the statue of Hermes, with the same spline pose and stand. The former image that you objected to, a painting, is more informative than the image you placed. I've got photos of Dionysus I've taken myself, I'll browse em and upload any that might help the article as well. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 00:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I have no problem with a new image. I and others feel the Renaissance one is too atypical. You can revert for now if you want, I'm leaving it. Alexander 007 00:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'm sorry you feel that way (about refusing to revert for discussion). I'm going to revert the page and return the image to the top, and make an edit to place your suggested image in the article elsewhere, and browse my photo collection for others. I hope we won't be in an edit or revert war. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 00:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Good choice. I like the new image. I just took the previous one from Wiki commons in haste. It wasn't really the "gayness" that bothered me with the previous one, rather the Renaissance-ness. Alexander 007 01:36, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Glad you feel that way! My sincere thanks. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 01:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

ties to christianity

I think someone who knows a little more about it than I should talk about the Orphic tradition of eating bread as the symbolic flesh of Dionysus, and drinking wine as his symbolic blood.

• I've expanded upon that section. Fascinating stuff. CanadianCaesar 21:54, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Neo-paganism section unsourced

There is no source at all for this discussion of different sects in Hellenic Neopaganism. Is this someone's first-hand reporting? Jkelly 03:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

"God of Wine"

I'd just like to take issue with what appears to be a gross simplification in terms of dubbing Dionysus "The god of wine". This is one aspect of a god which is, effectively, the god of the irrational. As such wine is certainly an aspect of it - wine intoxicates, hence irrational - describing him as simply a god of wine ignores the far more animalistic and instinctual nature of Dionysus. The Bacchic cults did not induce women to run through woods tearing apart animals because they'd had slightly too much sherry. Orias 09:49, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Wasn't he also a god for something else besides wine? I think I remember that it was mentioned else where I just can't remember at the moment someone please inform me if I'm wrong (Grath Longfletch 20:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC))

We \in Bulgaria\ have studied, that Dionysus wasn't "The god of wine" of the Thracians, but their major God - "The god of the sun"!!! It's The Greeks who started worshiping him as "The god of wine"! Haven't you heard that??? Please, comment on this topic :) I'm sure that we should all research more :) (82.199.193.217 22:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)yavor)

almost certanly a late adition????

This is false. Though he was allways seen as being a late adition, never quite fitting in, evidence of his worship shows him at least as old as all other greek gods.

That sentence has been removed. Lots more should probably be removed from the article... --Akhilleus (talk) 02:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Christianity and Mnemonic Devices

I think it should be noted, the possibility that Paul was using Hellenistic Metaphoar when using these well known terms. Rather then inspiring Christianity, can there also be room for these allusions being explanitory instead? -- IdeArchos 16:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hittites and Dionysus

Is possible that Nysa, the birth-city of Dionysus was the city Kanesh or Nesa in Eastern Anatolia? Is possible that the etymology of name "Dionysus" is "Deus (the) Nesian" i.e "God the Hittite"?

Note: The real name of the indoeuropean Hittites was "Nesites" or Nesians.

Many Greeks were sure that the cult of Dionysus arrived in Greece from Anatolia, but Greek concepts of where Nysa was, whether set in Anatolia, or in Libya ('away in the west beside a great ocean'), Ethiopia (Herodotus), or Arabia (Diodorus Siculus), are variable enough to suggest that a magical distant land was intended, perhaps named 'Nysa' to explain the God's unreadable name, as the 'god of Nysa.' Apollodorus seems to be following Pherecydes, who relates how the infant Dionysus, god of the grapevine, was nursed by the rain-nymphs, the Hyades at Nysa. The Anatolian Hittites' name for themselves in their own language ("Nesili") was "Nesi," however.

From site:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/dionysus

--IonnKorr 17:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation?

Actually my question is about the enunciation, but that is usually specified along with the pronunciation. Anyone know if it's "dee oh NEE sus" or "dee OH nee sus" (or possibly something else I guess). — Donama 06:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You could consult a dictionary. Most Americans say "die oh NIGH sus". Don't really know what the pronunciation is in the rest of the English-speaking world. If your question is about the classical pronunciation, it might have been something like dee OH new sohs, but replicating their accent is tricky, since it was a pitch accent, and the placement of stress is controversial. --Akhilleus (talk) 06:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

a little more balanced discussion is in order (on: Christianity section)

The section on alleged ties between Christianity and Dionysus is quite weak and one-sided. Little is said about the arguments against this view. Furthermore, couldn't views of more mainstream scholars than Mr. Larson be cited? --Killerwasp 18:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)--

-as far as I can see, the idea christianity copied it is more of a conspiracy theory yet the article makes out that this is a widly accepted idea. You only need to look on Google and see the lack of articles on it (which if there was strong evidence of the idea being true you would hear more about it). Only reading the rest of the article you are aware of the differences between Jesus and Dionysus and that the similarities are greatly exagerated. Is it techniclly a conspiracy theory and if so, could we call it that in the article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.100.237.215 (talk • contribs) .

I agree that the article may be giving Larson undue weight. The views that the article attributes to him go well beyond "Parallels with Christianity"; if his theory that Dionysus is a "replica" of the "grand prototype Osiris" is noteworthy, it should be covered under Worship along with the possible Cretan antecedent. But I can't find evidence that this is a noteworthy view. Henrichs's article in OCD includes a paragraph on potential non-Greek "component"s to Dionysus without mentioning Osiris. Burkert in Greek Religion (p. 163) mentions Osiris only as a possible source for some aspects of Dionysus' cult from the seventh century and later: "[I]n the period after 660, the increasing influence of the Egyptian Osiris religion must be taken into account, something which can perhaps already be discerned in the ship processions of the sixth century." If there's no objection, I'll remove the discussion of Larson in a few days. EALacey 04:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. There is little evidence. Read the whole article. Does it really look like Jesus and Dionysus are the same? This should be deleted unless better evidence can be found. It certainly is a minority view. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.108.100.20 (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

the same, well, if brought to an extreme, no, and there is a lot of literature on the marriage of Kana and the pre-Christian era traditions. Google may not help, but so what. The Faculty of Theology Bochum (http) brought this article with many arguments and sources, and this service drew interesting parallels as well. Deleting the section is not an option, but giving a source with Dionysus stories independent from this context would be better than linking to atheist pages. --Flammingo^Hey 23:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Addition re Prosymnus

The following text was added today, but it wasn't properly formatted: therefore it didn't appear in the article though it did destroy the link to footnote 7. I have, for the present, reverted.

Wax Tokens of Libido, Whitney Davis "Note 34: We can be fairly sure that the pederastic-homosexual origin of the Dionysian myth of Priapus was perfectly well known: Dionysus made the fig-wood phallus (the prototype of the phallic herm) as a pleasurable (and in the event quite usable) substitute for the penis of his deceased boyfriend Prosymna (see Julius Rosenbaum, Die Lustseuche im Altertum [Halle: XX, 1839], sect. 17)."

The material may be useful, and could be added to footnote 7, but perhaps the editor would explain the initial words "Wax Tokens of Libido, Whitney Davis". Are they a reference to a book, or what? Also, what is the XX in the other reference? Andrew Dalby 10:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, that was my addition and I did not realized it had interfered with anything. I had simply parked the text there so as not to lose it while I was gathering additional materials. Thank you for bringing it over here, I should have dome it myself from the beginning. That said, the material on Prosymnus bears quite a bit of expansion. It seems to involve a tradition of Lernean mysteries that Pausanias respected enough to mention but to specifically refrain from detailing. The story itself has less to do with sodomy (a Judaeo-Christian-Moslem term) and more to do with Greek pederasty. It seems the two topics mutually illuminate each other here. And Clement of Alexandria chimed in on this, shooting himself in the foot by informing us of a tradition which otherwise would have been quite lost. That aside, I find the style of footnoting here quite confusing, not that I mean to change anything. But why are we not using the simpler <ref></ref>? Haiduc 11:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I find it difficult too, but I haven't found the energy to change it! Do by all means add the information back into the article. Andrew Dalby 20:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

referencing

Has anyone noticed that there are a lot of "ors" in this article. I mean, granted these things were written a veerrry long time ago and by diferent cultures and in all of these stories have a counterpart, but it seems like just about everything written in this wikiarticle about Dionysus states that "either this or this happened" and nothing seems to be confirmed as is... or was.... or would be... DrakeKobra 20:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

That seems to be the general rule for mythographical writing (unless you are setting out to write a good story) since there were many different and sometimes conflicting traditions (practically every state had its own tradition of Zeus being born in that vicinity), and stories kept changing over the course of time as well, as poets told their local stories or made up new ones. Haiduc 18:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Epithet?

The following epithet is purported to be discussed in Jameson, in "The Asexuality of Dionysus." Masks of Dionysus. Ed. Thomas H. Carpenter and Christopher A. Faraone. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1993. ISBN 0-8014-8062-0. 44-64: "Dionysus Khoiropsalas, for which "cunt-plucker" has been suggested, of Sicyon." This term, which doesn't appear in any literature at JSTOR, is obscure enough to warrant a reference. --Wetman 04:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The intrusion of this obscure reference, a ludibrium that throws no light on Dionysus, is simply a high-schooler's way of inserting a faintly prurient line into an article in which he has shown no other interest whatsoever. If Dionysus Khoiropsalas is attested at Sicyon, it will be in a published inscription, which, since it's not otherwise mentioned anywhere in the literature, needs a citation. A more authentically useful approach might be to create a Wikipedia article on Michael H. Jameson, author of the article in question. --Wetman 14:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey, that's ok. I understand that you're the King of Wikipedia and that works put out with the names of jokers like Christopher Faraone on them can't REALLY be expected to be taken seriously. It's good, at least, that someone out there's taken up the task of protecting the god's good name from would-be hooligans. Enjoy your article! --Ben iarwain 21:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Parallels with Christianity

Scholars universally reject this ridiculous idea. Dionysus was not born of a virgin, he was conceived by Zeus and Semele. He was not a life death rebirth deity. He did not turn water into wine, but rather left jars outside overnight, and wine filled them up in the morning. PLEASE fix that chapter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.251.243 (talk) 01:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay I know this is late, but one version of Dionysos' birth was that Semele was fed a concotion from Zeus that was made from Zagreus-Dionysos' heart. I'll try to get that for you/the article. You are right on the second part, though I believe the comparison is that they made wine from something else (Dionysos: nothing at all; Jesus: water). Hope that helps. --Disinclination (talk) 22:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

There appears to be some large pixellated (sp?) goatse-ish picture in the "Worship" section - I'm not sure when this happened or how to revert that, but could someone address that? --Elro 01:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed from "worship" section

...and early Christianity (see "possessed by the saint"), as well as the preliminary animal sacrifice and distribution of meat to the village population, are at their origin not the Christian rites they are constructed as by the villagers who perform them, but the rites of Dionysus.<ref>[http://www.anagnosis.gr/index.php?la=eng&pageID=143 The Anastenaria: The Ancient Ecstatic Fire-Walking Ritual of Greece]</ref>

There is no "possessed by the saint" section in the Christianity article, and it is not a feature of Christianity I have ever heard of.

The Anastenaria are not only undocumented (per source) in "early Christianity", it is not even a characteristically Greek custom, let alone characteristically Christian. This is all according to the cited source, which places it strictly within small communities of Thracian refugees dating from the Balkan wars. As phrased, it's an extremely misleading passage not supported by the source in its breadth. If this belongs in the article at all -- and it probably does -- it should be in a section on modern Dionysian survivals. "Worship" is plainly the wrong place. Whatever these people think they're doing, they to not believe themselves to be worshiping Dionysus even if the Church condemns the practice as Dionysian in origin. (And as even the source states, there's no evidence of any such rite in antiquity, so this could easily be an error all around.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Parallels to Christianity

This section is written as if the issue was not in doubt, and very much needs balance.

Some of the material is very obscure. Although I can draw inferences as well as the next professional logician, I confess to being no classicist, so could someone please tell me what lines 3.690-691 have to do with this? A complaint about the length of a tale doesn't seem particularly apt. Perhaps Latin scholars can see parallels where the rest of us can't, but if so it needs to be explicated. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I tried a bit of a rewrite, but I came up against a problem. Early in the section it claims Dionysus turned water in to wine - later in the section it claims he never did. Short of removing both I can't find a way to resolve this. 199.71.183.2 20:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The whole section is poorly written, very biased, poorly referenced, and should be deleted, IMO. · AndonicO ^Talk 21:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Either delete it or re-write it - for a start Jesus wasn't born in a cave, to make out Dionysus was a virgin birth is really trying to twist the birth story, claims like "He stands between life and death, man and god, male and female." aren't referenced and stretching it for a parallel, since when was Jesus 'sexually ambiguous.' - there's no paralel here at all! claims like "depicted either nude or fully clothed." are also stretching it - how else are we expecting him to be depicted (and when did Jesus go around nude? He may have gone around fully clothed but then so do I and I'm not ripped off from Dionysus!) The article says Dionysus is the god of wine, so why does the parallels list say Dionysus was a death god? Jesus wasn't a sailor. "He was not an Olympian at first." and the fact Jesus wasn't an Olympian too says what? "In his worship, followers would consume human flesh, held to represent the god himself." and the evidence for this is? Finally the reference for Dionysus on a cross goes to an amulet which actually post-dates Christianity. Can we find some more credible sources to reference it to? Hardly any scholar thinks Christianity was ripped off from Dionysus yet the article does not give this impression —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.189.76 (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, this section is really biased-sounding and a lot like that that Zeitgeist web movie. I'm agnostic (so, no bias here), and to me many of the comparisons are really reaching. I'd knock out probably 2/3 or more of them. Maybe there are parallels, but please be more scholarly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.207.55.154 (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Whoever finds sources might add some of these claims (and the reference) back to the article:

• He is the son of a god (Zeus) and a mortal woman and not of his actual human father (It is not entirely clear if she might have been a virgin, the conception however was immaculate)
• The god impregnates the virgin mother without sexual intercourse. (He gives her the heart of the dead Dionysos to eat in order to impregnate her)
• He is killed and reborn. His name means "twice born". He's worshipped as a god of immortality.
• He was born in a cave.
• Right after his birth his life was threatened by a powerful ruler (Hera).
• He is sexually ambiguous. In early portrayals he has long curled hair and a pale complexion. Later, he is shown with a long beard.
• He is depicted either nude or fully clothed.
• He is a sailor and can perform miracles at sea.
• He is a death god, a god that is human, a god that brings people closer to the god of the afterlife.
• He travels and teaches people a new religion.
• He transforms the community.
• He wore a headband/crown.
• He is a god of the people and of physical pleasures.
• He is a major god and the son of Zeus, the highest ranking god. He was not an Olympian at first.
• In his worship, followers would consume human flesh, held to represent the god himself.
• He was called a king.

Some seem to be fantasy, some may have ancient sources telling us so.--Flammingo^Hey 01:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thracia

Dionysos is claimed a Thracian god in Thracians page. And on Dyonisos page all is wordy and fuzzy. I remember from some turkish mithologists that D. was born in way East, ie current Iran into some people of grape vine agriculture and wine culture and traveled West, cult-entertaining the youth. 67.86.55.243 09:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC) wikici

current Iran evokes very misleading contexts. I found one unsourced claim he was born in Nysa, Anatolia, which of course even if true would only be one story among many, gods usually don't have a place of birth on Earth.--Flammingo^Hey 10:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

story sea voyage

From the sea voyage story, this had been tagged as unclear:Others say that Dionysus came on board after these sailors, having leapt ashore, captured him, stripped him of his possessions, and tied him with ropes they had almost succeeded. I agree, not only need some of the last words to be removed, but also there should be a quote for this, which would be easy to find (I just believe this second version was added later and would rather go for just one)--Flammingo^Hey 10:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)