Talk:Eos

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments[edit]

Wetman, if you read straight through the article "rosy-fingered" is mentioned extensively. I took out the cryptic, passing parenthetical reference because I don't think it adds very much; Homer is quoted directly a few lines further down. As someone with the copyedit perspective of coming to this article for the first time (as opposed to the perspective of someone in the thick of it) I found the parenthetical reference out of place and unnecessary. --Chinasaur 08:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Right you are. A fresh eye sees clearly. --Wetman 09:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Eos and angels[edit]

"Eos is the iconic original from which Christian angels were imagined, for no images were available from the Hebrew tradition, and the Persian angels were unknown in the West."

Er, is that sure? They are many winged figures in the Greek mythology: the winds (see Image:Hyakinthos.jpg for instance), victory and of course Eros, who is even represented draped in hellenistic and late representations, such as Image:Draped Eros Louvre Myr139.jpg. There is not much difference with good old Christmas angels. Jastrow 17:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Amend the text. You might mention that Athene had lost her wings before the classic period. --Wetman


wow, she has nice tits... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.30.128.214 (talk) 05:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

what else is there?[edit]

people talk about her rosey fingers all the time that they dont talk about her history or anything else. all i know about her is that she has rosey fingers and she is the goddess of dawn. (Anon.)

With that and her lover-consorts, especially Tithonus, you've got it; inventing full biographies for mythic figures is the game of Christian hagiography. The Greeks didn't indulge. --Wetman 23:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Transliteration[edit]

Is the appropriate archaic transliteration into Greek, 'Έως' or 'Ηώς'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nalco (talkcontribs) 23:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As stated in the opening sentence, 'Έως' is the Attic (basically in and around Athens) form, derived from 'Ηώς' the Ionic form (Attic being a sub-dialect of Ionic, though the one that became most important). Johundhar (talk) 03:45, 16 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cognates[edit]

The etymology of Eostre/Easter is too obscure to cite so assuredly here.--Wetman (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why not? Beekes has it (or at least includes the OHG cognate) in his article on p. 493, and that's about as authoritative as you get! :) And West uses the word 'undoubtedly' when expressing the possibility of a connection (p. 227).Johundhar (talk) 04:09, 16 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

?[edit]

Does Eos have anything to do with Christianity? Answer Quick please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.116.12 (talk) 12:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dusk[edit]

Is she also the goddess of dusk, when the sky turns rose sometimes as well? 77.175.64.145 (talk) 19:04, 25 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lucifer[edit]

Since "Lucifer" is not mentioned in this article, I have removed the category. Per WP:CATV all categories must be supported by reliable secondary sources as well as text in the article body that directly and explicitly describes their relevance. 2600:8800:1880:FC:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 02:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverted. The "Eosphoros" mentioned in the article is the Grek term for Lucifer. Dimadick (talk) 07:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're going to have to make a direct correlation using WP:RS and making it explicit, otherwise you're going to have a case of WP:SYNTH on your hands. 2600:8800:1880:FC:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 13:53, 25 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Equivalent Deities[edit]

Uṣás is an equivalent deity of Eos. Their names are cognates, they both are daughters of the sky god (duhitā́r-diváh and thugátēr Diós), both described as "bringers of light" ("bhānty Usásah" and "λαμπρο-φαής"), both are associated with gold (híraṇya-varṇā and khrysopédillos), both are associated with red, both are described as dancers (nṛtūr iva and χοροί), both have light hands (híraṇyapāṇi and rhodópēkhus/rhododáktylos), both ride chariots, both open doors of heaven (dvā́rau ... Diváḥ and θύρας ... φαεινάς), both are reluctant bringers of light, and it is reliably sourced.[1][2][3]

References

  1. ^ Mallory, James P.; Adams, Douglas Q. (1997). Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-884964-98-5.
  2. ^ Mallory, James P.; Adams, Douglas Q. (2006). The Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-929668-2.
  3. ^ West, Martin Litchfield (2007). Indo-European Poetry and Myth. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-928075-9.
Do any of these sources call them "eqivalent"? Paul August 20:57, 6 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes they refer to these deities as equivalent in the various Indo-European religions. They go in depth about the Proto-Indo-Europeans, their reconstructed religion, and the various evidences found by these common equivalents found in daughter religion. The Sky father, Earth mother, Dawn goddess, Divine twins, and Thunder god are the the most common and widely accepted deities among scholars who have studied the Indo-European deities. In the Greek religion they are attested as Zeus Pater, Ouranos and Gaia, Eos, and the Dioskuri. In the Vedic relgion they are attested as Dyaush Pitra, Prithvi Mata, Ushas, the Ashvins, and Indra. In the Roman religion they are attested as Jupiter, Tullus Mater, and Aurora.Chariotrider555 (talk) 23:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Much thanks for all this. If the sources you cite explicitly use the word "equivalent" as applied to Eos and Uṣás, then that would certainly be adequate sourcing. Unfortunately I'm unable to verify this. I can't find such a usage in these works available online, and I don't have easy access to the works themselves (libraries being unavailable because of Covid). Could you possibly provide relevant quotes with page numbers? That would be much appreciated, thanks ;-) Paul August 14:10, 7 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

... A TITANESS AND A GODDESS ???[edit]

With no reference...

(when you check the so-called reference)

Obviously, since you cannot be both: God and Goddesses being the children of the Titans.

Which distinguish one another:

just like Chronos is the Titan, kind of that personnify Time and IS NOT AND NEVER WERE the God of Time

And, we can go on like that with: Gaïa, Ouranos, Atlas, etc..., etc... So many other exemples that all prove that Titans aren't Gods.

--90.6.160.214 (talk) 03:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No the twelve Titans, along with their parents (Gaia, and Uranus) and their offspring (Eos, the sun god Helios, and the moon goddess Selene, etc.) were all gods. The Titans (Cronus, Rhea, etc.) were an earlier generation of gods, prior to the Olympian gods (Zeus, Hera etc.) And Gaia and Uranus were primordial gods. Paul August 12:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Ok, sorry if that's the case...

i'm gonna double check because i don't remember it like that, i loved greek mythology as a child.

But anyways, Thanks for your answer :)

--90.6.160.214 (talk) 00:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eos's children[edit]

This article says Eos's children included the stars, but the word stars links to the article for Astra Planeta (Greek for wandering stars), which are planets. I'm not sure what to make of that. If Eos's children were actual stars, then the link should be changed. If his children were planets, then the label should be changed (maybe to wandering stars, instead of just stars). And if he gave birth to both stars and planets, then that should be noted. - Burner89751654 (talk) 18:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Burner89751654: Indeed. This is what the sources themselves say:
Hesiod, Theogony 378–82: "Eos, a goddess bedded in love with a god, bore to Astraeus the strong-spirited winds, clear Zephyrus and swift-pathed Boreas and Notus; and after these the Early-born one bore the star, Dawn-bringer, and the shining stars with which the sky is crowned."
Apollodorus, 1.2.4: "... to Dawn and Astraeus were born winds and stars; ..."
These passages just seem to be stating that Eos is the mother of the stars, not some specific divinities with distinct identities such as the Astra Planeta. Looking through a few modern sources on the subject, they simply state that the children in question are "stars". In fact, I am yet to find any mention of the "Astra Planeta" in any modern scholarly source, and their article is wholly unsourced, as well as, I suspect, based entirely on Theoi.com. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:35, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, Eos is female. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:36, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In Hesiod's time they knew that the other stars didn't appear to move relative to each other, while the Astra Planeta did. But the difference between planets and stars wasn't widely fully understood until thousands of years after Hesiod's time. If there's no good source to suggest that Eos's star kids were exclusively the Astra Planeta, then I suspect that when Hesiod said Eos bore the stars, he meant the actual stars plus the Astra Planeta. In that case, I think it's ok for the article for the Astra Planeta to continue to say that Eos was their mother. But on this article for Eos, the word for stars should link to the article for actual stars, and should include a note that says the understanding of stars at the time included stars plus other planets, and the words "other planets" should link to the article for the Astra Planeta. - Burner89751654 (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The sources that we have, ancient and modern, state that her children are simply the "stars", and this should be sufficient for this article. A link to star shouldn't be necessary, since I think we can assume that our readers know what stars are. I'll fix this myself in a moment.
My primary concern, however, is the article Astra Planeta. Most of the article apparently came from an IP whose contributions seem to mostly revolve around this topic. Prior to that, the article seems to have consisted of nothing but a mirror of some information from Theoi. I am still yet to find a mention of the "Astra Planeta" in any modern source on Greek mythology, and most of the sources on Theoi's website seem to just be references to the stars or planets by different authors. – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:19, 12 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]