Talk:Heracles

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Heracles article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 2 months

Greece High‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Top‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Edit request

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add a hatnote to handle the incoming redirect Herakles

Please add

{{redirect|Herakles|other uses|Herakles (disambiguation)|and|Heracles (disambiguation)}}

-- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 22:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why isnt the pederasty brought up?

Iolaus was his nephew and 12, correct? im not hallucinating that? i think an important tid-bit like that should atleast be mentioned somewhere in the article 47.249.2.238 (talk) 01:29, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where you have info he was 12? Also, Iolaus was Heracles's companion for many years, he surely outgrow age of 12 during this time. Sobek2000 (talk) 09:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The relationship is there in the first paragraph in the 'Men' subsection of 'lovers' section. The first mention of Iolaus further up the page states: 'His twin mortal brother, son of Amphitryon, was Iphicles, father of Heracles's charioteer Iolaus.' So the only detail that's missing in the supposed age, for which I have yet to find a source. Endlesspumpkin (talk) 15:04, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was not asking you for their kinship. I am well aware Iolaus was his nephew. I asked you for source that says Heracles slept with him when Iolaus was 12. Sobek2000 (talk) 15:44, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sobek2000: Endlesspumpkin was responding to the first poster, not to you. Paul August ☎ 17:06, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, my bad! Sobek2000 (talk) 17:21, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2024

RESOLVED

Closing this discussion, which has gone far off topic. Talk pages are for discussing improving their associated articles. The requested edit has been made, and I don't see that any of the discussion which will follow from this point will be productive to the encyclopedia. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:00, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change all mentions of "girdle" to "war belt" or "belt".

(for more info regarding the importance of this change please refer to sources #3 and #4 in the intro paragraph to the page about Hippolyta) Morallygrace (talk) 01:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just "belt" - but your edit summary at the Labours of "changed girdle to belt; the proper translation is belt, the idea of hercules stealing a queen's undergarment is a mistranslation rooted in misogynistic sexual fantasy" is extremely silly, and rather ignorant! We don't know what Heracles might have worn around his waist, but I suppose "belt" will cover it ok. Johnbod (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the change. Reliable sources on the subject seem to think "belt" is more accurate. For instance, Timothy Gantz's Early Greek Myth says that:

For Homer the zoster is a war belt, something worn outside other clothing as part of one's defensive armor, as we see in the case of Menelaos when Pandaros wounds him in the Iliad (Il 4.132–39). Certainly it is never part of a woman's intimate apparel, and the common English translation "girdle" is grossly misleading.

In a similar vein, see Robin Hard's Routledge Handbook of Greek Mythology, p. 263. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another ignoramus - I'm pretty sure the Girdle (undergarment) meaning is no older than the last century (the original OED doesn't have it), while other girdle meanings are far older, although I suppose the underwear meaning is now most common. Johnbod (talk) 02:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused; are you calling Gantz an "ignoramus" for the statement he makes in his book, or me one for suggesting we should follow what he says? The comment just seems unnecessary. I see no reason to not follow what reliable sources such as Gantz and Hard state. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think their complaint is that these people are all silly for thinking that anyone was using 'girdle' to mean undergarment. They should all have been aware that this "new" meaning is only 100 years old, and thus anyone using it more than 100 years ago could not have been using it to mean 'undergarment'.

No one seems to actually disagree that 'belt' would be an acceptable change though. Given that we live in a world in which words are subject to semantic shift, what older authors intended by 'girdle' is far less important (in terms of encyclopaedias) than what current readers will understand by it. Belt is clearer. Endlesspumpkin (talk) 11:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but I wasn't suggesting anyone was using "girdle" to mean "undergarment", just that modern reliable sources seem to use and prefer "belt"; I made no comment upon Morallygrace's edit summary, or their claim that "girdle" here is a mistranslation rooted in misogynistic sexual fantasy, which I agree with Johnbod seems quite clearly wrong. But as you say, no one actually seems to disagree on the actual change being requested, and so I've edited the article accordingly. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will stand corrected at the archaic meaning of girdle! I do find the continued use of that translation does still have misogynistic undertones, even if we acknowledge that an earlier gender non-specific definition of girdle exists.

.

In today's English, girdle does refer to a type of shapewear typically worn by women, and translations should consider the social aspect: does this translation communicate the right concept to the people reading the translation? Do people today think of a war belt when they hear the term girdle, or would they be prompted to imagine mid-century corsetry?

.

I'm glad to know there's a reason girdle was used, but I think my misunderstanding also represents what associations the genpop has with girdles, and how misogyny-affected people (who are also unaware of the full history of the definition of girdle) might feel alienated by that choice. Morallygrace (talk) 14:00, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, whomever Johnbod meant as "ignoramus", neither Gantz, nor Hard, nor Michael Aurel is one. Nor, in my opinion, were any of those three ever under the impression that the translators of zoster thought it referred to a woman's undergarment. So not sure who here might be justly thought of as ignorant:^[1]

I meant Gantz, for the quoted "grossly misleading"; it may not be the best modern translation, but it is certainly not that. User:Morallygrace clearly did think this, as their edit summary shows: "changed girdle to belt; the proper translation is belt, the idea of hercules stealing a queen's undergarment is a mistranslation rooted in misogynistic sexual fantasy". Johnbod (talk) 13:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, semantic shifts considered, it IS a mistranslation. The general populus is not referring to the type of belt as a girdle. And it DOES call to mind a man stealing a woman's undergarments to those who are not aware of the history of girdles, which your average person is not. Please keep in mind that the piint of wikipedia is to make information more accessible. Also please keep in mind that reacting so strongly to seeing that someone is misinformed is a) not an affective way to correct them, and b) just plain childish. Any intellectual superiority you may have had by knowing more about this particular piece of history is thrown out by your choice to be insulting over something so small, as well as your inability to plainly correct the misconception and then move. on. Morallygrace (talk) 14:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John, if you're struggling to share your disagreement without name-calling perhaps it's time to log off. Morallygrace (talk) 13:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, who's having trouble moving on? It was probably the gratuitous and wholly misplaced sexism of your edit summary that provoked my reaction. You may want to be more careful about that here than on your social media. Johnbod (talk) 14:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm waking up and replying to the thread where I've been insulted, John. That's a normal, proportionate reaction.

My comment was hardly "gratuitous" or "sexist," I'm sorry to see that you're having such big feelings about pretty minor feedback. I will not allow people to bully and intimidate me over such a stupid thing. I hope you can figure out a way to respond to disagreements without getting so emotional in the future. Morallygrace (talk) 14:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ i.e. uneducated, unknowledgeable, untaught, unschooled, untutored, untrained, illiterate, unlettered, unlearned, unread, uninformed, unenlightened, unscholarly, unqualified, benighted, backward, inexperienced, unworldly, unsophisticated, unintelligent, stupid, simple, empty-headed, mindless, pig-ignorant, thick, airheaded, dense, dumb, dim, dopey, wet behind the ears, slow on the uptake, dead from the neck up, a brick short of a load, dozy, divvy, daft, not the full shilling, (as) thick as two short planks, glaikit, chowderheaded, dumb-ass, or dotish.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Citation needed...

"He was renamed Heracles in an unsuccessful attempt to mollify Hera, with Heracles meaning Hera's "pride" or "glory"."

Is there a source for this claim?

2001:8003:F231:BC00:6C09:CF4F:882C:23E0 (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed, as I'm unable to find a source for this. A fragment of Pindar (fr. 291 SM) states instead that he received the name because he achieved fame and acclaim as a result of her challenge, while Apollodorus (2.4.12) writes that the name is given to him by the oracle of Delphi. Another explanation is apparently that he received the name for preventing Porphyrion from raping Hera. Nothing about it being an attempt to please Hera, though. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] .e. uneducated, unknowledgeable, untaught, unschooled, untutored, untrained, illiterate, unlettered, unlearned, unread, uninformed, unenlightened, unscholarly, unqualified, benighted, backward, inexperienced, unworldly, unsophisticated, unintelligent, stupid, simple, empty-headed, mindless, pig-ignorant, thick, airheaded, dense, dumb, dim, dopey, wet behind the ears, slow on the uptake, dead from the neck up, a brick short of a load, dozy, divvy, daft, not the full shilling, (as) thick as two short planks, glaikit, chowderheaded, dumb-ass, or dotish.

[1]