Talk:Minos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

La Marle material[edit]

If I understand correctly, La Marle's conclusions about Linear A or the Minoans are not mainstream, to put it nicely, and therefore are really not to be considered as fact. Is there a way, therefore, to de-emphasize material from him in this article? Washi (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Dante's Inferno video game info[edit]

just thinking that it might be good to add a section about Mino's role in Dante's Inferno as a judge of the domned.

Just throwing this out there, but I believe the actual gameplay strategy on how to defeat Minos should be taken out. This isn't a strategy for the game; the first paragraph should suffice. NintendoTim (talk) 03:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think many people would come to Wikipedia looking to see what Minos' role in Dante's Inferno was. If they needed that information, I'm sure they would play the game, or go to a game guide site. Just saying- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.187.93.92 (talk) 01:16, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Modern allusions should at least be separate[edit]

"In Masami Kurumada's anime Saint Seiya, Minos is, with Aeacus and Radamanthys, one of the three Generals of the Underworld, and wears the surplice of the Griffon, Celestial Valiant Star."

I don't think that addition makes any sense here in an article on a figure from Greek myth. It doesn't seem to be anything more than a modern allusion to an ancient source, of which there are many; this one probably doesn't deserve to be privileged as the only one. As a japanese appropriation of western sources, there might be something interesting there - but I think its inclusion needs to be justified first. If someone wanted to create a "modern allusions to Minos" section, this could probably be placed there - but until then, I'm going to take it off. It certainly doesn't fit as the last line of the article. The greek myths were indeed reinterpreted by many authors, but if we aren't going to trace their reinterpretation from all the interceding periods between the classical and contemporary, it simply doesn't fit to jump from ancient to manga - especially since the idea of "generals of the underworld" is a rather stark departure from anything to be found in the ancient sources.

Pronunciation[edit]

My-nos or Mi-nos? The Singing Badger 00:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, nobody answered this one. Either "i" as in "kite" or "i" as in "spaghetti" will do. I've heard both. --Glengordon01 05:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The pronunciation is given as /ˈmaɪnɒs/ or /ˈmaɪnəs/. The Greek name is Μίνως which is Minōs. The pronunciation is clearly wrong. It should be /ˈmɪnɒs/.

ICE77 (talk) 20:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

It absolutely should be /ˈmɪnɒs/, unless the English pronunciation is deliberately different than the Greek one.

Beware[edit]

The "Menes", "Mannus", "Manu" etc. connections are most probably taken from a completely unsubstantiated movie called "Zeitgeist", which includes "truths" such as that 9/11 was "definitely" an inside job etc. --fs 12:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I've read this in several places and think the theory has been around for a long time... from google book search, I just found an account of it from 1845 in 'on the origin and ramifications of the english language' by Henry Welsford. Whether it's reliable or not, I don't know. 28th August 2009

Mythology/literature[edit]

there should not be a divide between minos as a literary figure and minos as a mythological figure. mythology IS literature. the two are inherently linked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.38.48 (talk) 23:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

In art[edit]

Referring to Michelangelo's The Last Judgement, it is probably incorrect to say: With his tail coiled around him, Minos judges the damned… It seems more likely that the tip of the tail seen over Minos' right shoulder belongs to a serpent that is coiled around him, and which has hold of his penis in its mouth. --DStanB (talk) 14:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

First king of Crete[edit]

Initially it says that Minos was the first king of Crete, then later says that his father was also a king of Crete. Why the discrepancy? I can understand if there were multiple different versions of the story--that doesn't seem to be too uncommon in Greek myth--but it would be nice to have this pointed out if true. It's a little confusing as it stands. 209.136.39.130 (talk) 17:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I totally agree with the user above. I noticed the same discrepancy. In fact, the adoptive father of Minos, Asterion, was a king of Crete. Even the father of Asterion, Dorus, was a king of Crete. Therefore, Minos cannot be the first king of Crete.
ICE77 (talk) 20:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Inconsistencies[edit]

There are a few issues with this article that need to be clarified.

1. "Every nine years, he made King Aegeus pick seven young boys and seven young girls to be sent to Daedalus's creation".

The article is inconsistent with the article on Androgeos that says "The king obliged the Athenians to send several youths every seven or nine years to be devoured by the Minotaur".

2. "By Androgeneia of Phaestus he had Asterion, who commanded the Cretan contingent in the war between Dionysus and the Indians."

Did Minos have a son called Asterion like his adoptive father and the Minotaur (known originally as Asterion)?

3. "Minos gained the love of Scylla and her aid in cutting off her father's hair so that he could conquer the city. After his triumph ...".

This is inconsistent with the article on Androgeos that says "Minos led a war against Athens to avenge the death of his son, but failed to sack the city".

4. If "good" Minos's son is Lycastus and Lycastu's son is "bad" Minos then how can Minos be son of Zeus? This is totally inconsistent.

5. "She was changed into a shearer bird, relentlessly pursued by her father, who was a falcon."

Who changed her?

ICE77 (talk) 07:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Connection to Mannus, Menes, etc.[edit]

The following text

Some scholars see a connection between Minos and the names of other ancient founder-kings, such as Menes of Egypt, Mannus of Germany, and Manu of India,[5][6] and even with Meon of Phrygia and Lydia (after him named Maeonia), Mizraim of Egypt in the Book of Genesis and the Canaanite deity Baal.[7]

only cites 19th century scholarship. The last citation (7) is from a book on the history of the English language, the first is a citation of a review article of the second, which seems to be a sort of quixotic study of the Hesperides. These derivations strike me as unlikely to still be true in current scholarship, unless someone can find a more recent citation. These names all appear superficially similar but I can see major problems in deriving them from each other, particularly the ones that aren't even Indo-European. @Katolophyromai: do you know where we might find some new sources on this?--Ermenrich (talk) 00:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ermenrich: I am not aware of any works of modern scholarship that lend any support to the hypothesis that the names Minos, Menes, Mannus, and Manu are in any way related and this hypothesis seems to me extraordinarily implausible. It sounds like one of the many crackpot theories people came up with in the nineteenth century that have since been abandoned. A connection to the names Mannus, Manu, and Meon might not be unreasonable, because Greek, the Germanic languages, Sanskrit, and Phrygian are all Indo-European and there could be a connection to Proto-Indo-European mythology, but, if that were the case, the name could not be related to Menes or Mizraim, since Egyptian is not an Indo-European language. Likewise, a connection between Minos and only the name Menes might also be vaguely within the realm of plausibility, but, if that were the case, the name could not be derived from Proto-Indo-European, so it could not be related to any of the other names. The connection to Baal is just downright implausible no matter how you look at it. I would say this passage probably ought to be removed, unless someone can provide a very strong source supporting it written by a contemporary scholar. —Katolophyromai (talk) 05:09, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Katolophyromai:, The whole section seems to be in pretty bad shape, with various statements unsourced. This senctence, for instance: "The royal title ro-ja is read on several documents, including on stone libation tables from the sanctuaries, where it follows the name of the main god, Asirai (the equivalent of Sanskrit Asura, and of Avestan Ahura)." The deity Asirai is not mentioned on the Cretan religion article at all. I have no way of judging whether it existed, was a main god, etc.
Also, the section cites a certain La Marle who claims to have decyphered the name "Minos" in Linear A, while most scholars think linear A is undecyphered and criticism of La Marle is even noted in the article.
It seems to me that the whole section should probably be blanked, except perhaps the statement that Minos is often taken to have meant king.
Indeed, large parts of the article are only cited to primary sources.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)