Talk:Maenad

Greece Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merging

The article Bacchants is merged into this article; Maenads and Bacchants are essentially the same thing. (^'-')^ Covington 02:32, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is merged. Left it for future reference. Lophostrix (talk) 15:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Misquotes

I think this article misquotes Plato's Ion in the beginning--where is the citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.2.222.49 (talk) 07:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikifying

This article needs careful linking.--Wetman (talk) 06:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dancing off a cliff?

In the movie "Dangerous" starring Bette Davis, Franchot Tone says that The Maenads would dance off the edge of a cliff in their frezy. Is this mentioned in any of the Greek litrature? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.131.58.93 (talk) 14:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

C. S. Lewis

In "Prince Caspian", Susan and Lucy are nervous about the maenads, and note that they would not feel safe around them without Aslan present. They are indeed depicted as energetic, dancing girls, but there are hints that they are more than mere dancing children. 165.234.134.202 (talk) 01:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maenads on TV (SPOILER BELOW)

Look out for the revelation of a Maenad on TV's True Blood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.127.70 (talk) 21:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The maenad in the book *does* have a thrysus. I don't know if the one in TV does. Cantras (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least in myth?

—and, at least in myth

Well, it all would be, wouldn't it? This article is very poorly written and poorly sourced. 76.64.153.18 (talk) 23:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Maenad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Maenads

The article states: "Maenads were known as Bassarids, Bacchae or Bacchantes in Roman mythology after the penchant of the equivalent Roman god, Bacchus, to wear a bassaris or fox-skin." This sentence feels wrong, as it seems to imply the bassaris is the reason for all three names, whereas Bacchae and Bacchantes come just from Bacchus's name. I'd rephrase it as follows: "In Roman mythology, Maenads were known either as Bacchae or Bacchantes, after the equivalent Roman god, Bacchus, or as Bassarids, after Bacchus's penchant for wearing a bassaris or fox-skin." Kumagoro-42 (talk) 22:21, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it sounds wrong as well as being inaccurate. I encourage you to change it yourself. Hse643 (talk) 20:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)Hse643[reply]

Too many pictures

The reason I removed all the pictures was because I feel there are too many for such a short article, to the point there seems to be more pictures than text. The article already has several problems and this adds one more. I even feel like all the pictures distract from the fact that the article has very little info and is overall not great. It seems past editors spent more time adding pictures than improving the article, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. Hse643 (talk) 19:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)Hse643[reply]

If you think the article could be better, go ahead and improve it. But you deleted the gallery, which exists precisely because Maenads are known to a considerable degree because of their regular depiction in art from antiquity to modern times. Galleries are supposed to consist entirely of pictures; if a gallery is included in an article, you should think long and hard about whether it should be removed altogether. A large gallery could of course be pruned if it contains some images that seem less useful for illustrating the topic of the article; for example if a character in a novel makes a drawing of a Maenad, including the drawing probably doesn't contribute much to the coverage of Maenads, although if the novel is well-known, and the drawing is an important element of it, you might mention that fact without including the drawing itself. But this article's gallery isn't that huge, and doesn't seem to contain a lot of unhelpful images. If the rest of the article seems skimpy, then by all means, find some sources and bulk it up. That should take care of any clutter issues with respect to the in-line pictures. P Aculeius (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strange formulation

"In the third century BC, when an Asia Minor city wanted to create a maenadic cult of Dionysus, the Delphic Oracle bid them send to Thebes for both instruction and three professional maenads, stating, "Go to the holy plain of Thebes so that you may get maenads who are from the family of Ino, daughter of Cadmus."

Does the passage in bold makes any sense in regards to English grammar? Not my first language but I feel this is a broken sentence. 208.111.73.91 (talk) 04:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The word "professional" is misused here; maenads do not profess anything, and are neither clerics, teachers, lawyers, or physicians. I do not think we would refer to any as "amateur" maenads either. The Oracle bid them send to Thebes for three maenads; that wording would be fine, and compounding the object to both instruction and three maenads is also fine. Perhaps the confusion arises from the word 'bid', which does not require the infinitive, though I do not think it would be incorrect to use it. I would probably have used the past tense "bade", although "bid" can be either past or present. The punctuation looks right.

I can see some problems with the rest of the sentence, however: "an Asia Minor city" is horribly vague and poorly worded; better to give the city's name, if known, or if not known, "a city in Asia Minor", not "an Asia Minor city". 'Go' should not be capitalized, as it occurs in the middle of a sentence, even though it begins the reported sentence; in theory we should write this as "[g]o", but if it is being quoted from a written source, I suppose it should use that source's capitalization. "Who are" is unnecessary, since "maenads from the family of Ino" would normally be understood to mean the same thing—I suppose you could instead mean "maenads belonging to the family of Ino", rather than descended from it, but that doesn't seem like a natural reading. But again, if this is quoted, then you cannot reword it. Lastly the clauses are inconsistent: if the oracle bid them send to Thebes for three maenads, she was not telling them to go to Thebes in order to obtain them. P Aculeius (talk) 05:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There were so many little things that seemed wrong with this paragraph that I searched for the source—it was tagged as uncited in 2019, but was first added with almost the same language, sans wikilinks, in 2008, by an editor who left no explanation of his or her changes. Fortunately, a simple Google search turned up either the original source of the quotation, or a similar version based on the same inscription from antiquity. I've rewritten the paragraph to make it clearer and less awkward, and have quoted the source I found, adding the citation. P Aculeius (talk) 06:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]