Talk:Lernaean Hydra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Greece (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the WikiProject for Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors who write Wikipedia's Classics articles. 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Mythology (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Cryptozoology (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on cryptozoology and cryptids on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

This article has an assessment summary page.

Miscellanea[edit]

Whose versions are being followed in this entry? Wetman 00:27, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What do you mean? ··gracefool | 01:16, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Exactly how is the sentence "In an alternate version, Hera sent a crab to bite his feet and bother him, hoping to cause his death" relevant? It doesn't seem to match the rest of the article. - Mike Rosoft 20:57, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I have found out. But the sentence needs to be moved (and perhaps rewritten) since it doesn't make sense in its current place. - Mike Rosoft 21:03, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I removed this text: Mythology about fighting giant snakes, and snake-like animals, that are invincible, appear to be a general archetype in reference to a solid extensive battle line with an indefatigable opposing army, (e.g. the Lambton worm represents the mediaeval Scottish army's raids into England). Since Lerna is in the direction of Sparta, the most war-like of all nations, tales of Sparta's might (from the point of view of a victim) may have formed such a snake myth, making the choice of the location for the story.

The Hydra Sucks major wang with its nine heads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swampdragon322 (talkcontribs) 23:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Though a chthonic supernatural serpent is indeed an archtype, the Lernaean Hydra is a great deal older than the founding of Sparta. It is a pre-Olympic death creature that Heracles overcomes. For similar approaches to explaining myth from human experiences, a late rationalization, see Euhemerus. --Wetman 02:39, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

How many Heads does a standard Hydra Have? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Debo7 (talkcontribs) 15:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Swamp thing[edit]

I read somewhere that it was a mythologization of the desecation of the swamp, the "upon cutting off each of its heads he found that two grew back" meaning that after a canal was dug to dry a parcel, water flowed from elsewhere.

Well now we have that, and the idea of cutting down weeds that keep coming back. Am I the only person that thinks someone came across a mating ball, and thought it was all one snake with dozens of heads?

Half-Life 2[edit]

Possibly mention that it was originally supposed to be in HAlf-Life 2, but painfully, it had to be cut because it wouldn't code well. 24.196.115.179 00:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It was cut and 2 more didn't spring up to replace it? Hmmm. Maybe it wasn't a hydra after all and the mention is best made on the game's article. Canuckle 00:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Bow[edit]

The greek word "τόξον" [1] means bow, not arrow as the article mentions. Should I change it? Tdgs

To be honest, the whole paragraph looks like it could be cut out. --5telios 12:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the paragraph:

The Greek word for arrow, which is toxon, is closely related to the Greek word for poison, which is toxis, thus the poison arrows that Heracles created from the Hydra's blood. Associations with the Nemaean lion may derive from recreating the surrounding narrative to suit an order in which the tale of the Hydra follows that of the lion.

The whole bow / arrow / poison thing cannot be supported.

--5telios 19:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

cut text[edit]

I cut this text from the constellation section as it repeats information available elsewhere in the article. .

the hydra was a very vicious creature who supposidly had 9 heads and to kill it you had to chop of its mortal head, as the lagend has it if you chop of one of the immortal heads the hydra will grow another, herculies killed this vicious beast by burning its head of

--5telios 08:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

== File:Headline text[[Media:--91.125.115.10 (talk) 18:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)Example.ogghi--91.125.115.10 (talk) 18:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)hi
Subscript text{| class="wikitable" border="1" |hi[1] |}]] ==

==

Removed text[edit]

I removed this text from the "Popular Culture" heading:

In 2009, Wizards of the Coast released the expansion to the Trading card Game, Magic the Gathering, 
it featured 2 powerful hydras, Progenitus and Apocalypse Hydra, both of which helped introduce new 
mechanics into the game. Progenitus has been celebrated since then as, The Soul of the World, being 
used in several winning decks in several different formats.

I removed this for several reasons. First, Magic has had hydras from the very beginning (Rock Hydra from Alpha, Beta, Unlimited, and Revised). They don't show up very often, but Progenitus and Apocalypse Hydra are hardly the first examples of hydras in the game (nor are they the most recent examples; Protean Hydra, released in Magic 2010, gets that honor). Second, they really do not "introduce new mechanics into the game." Perhaps these mechanics were new to the person that wrote this segment, but variations of these abilities appear on earlier cards. If either or both cards included keywords that were new to the set (for example, Wither in Shadowmoor) then they truly would be "introducing new mechanics." Finally, this section is poorly worded, with strange sentence structure and improper capitalization. I deem it a grammatical abomination and so I've terminated it.

This doesn't mean, however, no mention should be given of the existence of hydras in Magic. A more suitable sentence may be something like: "Throughout the years, the trading card game Magic: The Gathering has included depictions of hydras on several of its cards." I wouldn't use this exact sentence, as it still sounds rather unprofessional, but I couldn't think of anything better. 138.47.125.116 (talk) 10:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Rob

Incorrect name![edit]

In the Greek story, his name was HERACLES, NOT "Hercules."

SOMEONE NEEDS TO FIX THIS. Hercules was the Roman version of the story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.199.8.90 (talk) 16:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

God of War + 40K[edit]

I'm fairly sure the hydra in the beginning of God of War had more than 3 heads. During the stage you see other heads assaulting various vessels and people. What leads to the destruction of the Hydra is the impaling of a "main" head. Bigger, more elaborate and powerful, after which all other heads die and explode (even impaled, the two additional heads faced in that battle remain struggling to break free). Also, if we're just dropping mentions, in the Warhammer 40K universe, one of the legions of chaos space marines, the Alpha Legion, has it's combat philosophy based upon the legend of the hydra. A many-pronged attack from various directions and strategies, aiming to quickly confuse and overwhelm the enemy. They also adopt a decentralised leadership structure. "If one head is cut, it matters very little" and many alleged leaders of the legion have already been taken down by the Imperium and other foes, to very little visible effect on the Legion's working and efficiency. - 90.205.59.185 (talk) 14:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Heracles / Hercules[edit]

Maybe a line should be added about the Greek and Roman versions of the hero's name. Right now the article talks about "Heracles" and the photos are all of "Hercules" with no note clarifying the difference (or lack thereof). --24.80.172.211 (talk) 00:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

References[edit]

stories beyond Hercules' second labor.[edit]

There are multiple mentions by greek poets that the Hydra was raised by Hera, so that she would have a servant that could easily eliminate the illegitimate offspring of Zeus. Even more sources mention that the Hydra becomes a guardian of Hades after its death at the hands of Hercules. Should these be mentioned in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.155.113.22 (talk) 03:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Orthrus and Echidna[edit]

According to the article on Typhon, "Orthrus, a fearsome two-headed hound. According to Hesiod, he mated with his mother, Echidna, to sire Cerberus, the Nemean Lion, the Lernean Hydra, the Sphinx and the Chimera". I think this should be added to this article for completeness.

ICE77 (talk) 03:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Gender?[edit]

Where is the Hydra stated to be female? All the chronicles of Greek myths and the tasks of Hercules refer to the Hydra as "it", not "she". As is, this article refers to the Hydra as both "it" and "she". Its gender should be verified by a reliable source and that source should be included in the reverences section. 207.216.222.107 (talk) 03:37, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Nameless?[edit]

"was an ancient nameless serpent-like chthonic water beast, with reptilian traits, (as its name evinces..." seems to be contradictory. "Hydra" is capitalised throughout, suggesting it is a name rather than a description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.245.185 (talk) 08:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

There is no such thing as a "chthonic water beast"[edit]

Just a there is no such thing as a watery fire beast.

The use of 'chthonic' in this and a number if related articles is all screwy.

Also to the person wondering about gender the Hydra is feminine in Hesiod (Theogony). Also the gender of the name itself is feminine. However it seems reasonable when talking about a non-anthropomorphic monster to alternate between "it" and "she". Consistently calling it she makes it sound more feminine than female. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.6.146.126 (talk) 20:14, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Except "chtonic" means "having to do with the earth", nothing to do with fire. And why may an entity not be related to multiple elements? 92.108.210.53 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:47, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Sources[edit]

Shouldn't the article explicitly mention where the first literary or artistic / archaeological allusions to the Hydra are found? The article begins by saying "in Greek mythology, the Lernaean Hydra (Greek: Λερναία Ύδρα) was an ancient serpent-like water monster...," which is fine as far as it goes, but the fact that the article never clearly states when and where the evidence for its existence occurs implies that Greek mythology is an ahistorical entity that exists without reference to its sources. 850 C (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Well said! I came here to say exactly the same thing, or something very similar. This issue is focused by the bizarre sounding statement: "The mythic element is an equivocating attempt to resolve the submerged conflict between an ancient ten Labours and a more recent twelve". An equivocating attempt?? WTF does that mean in this regard? The paragraph this is from concerns the two versions of the Labours but is not referenced in any way. Is it being said that records of the myth being alluded to date to after the two versions of the Labours? Is it being said that no explanation in the earliest records we have reconciles the Ten Labours with the Twelve Labours in any way? As Talk 850 writes this article talks about the Labours of Hercules as if it were recounting an old news story rather than an ancient myth. This does the myth a grave disservice as it is obviously not, and to my mind never was written as an historical account! I believe that it is and always has been a myth, a story that serves to communicate a wisdom, or piece of "philosophical advice", in a way that is memorable and robust. The article needs to be framed so that it speaks of the myth via the evidence we have of it rather than dress it up in a style suitable for presentation to Junior School. I would suggest that mythological "knowledge" was/is primarily oral, and that we only have the evidence of the myths that were committed into graphic or textual forms, by particular authors, and that have survived. This contextualizing information is not secondary to the myth as we understand it, not something that can be appended as a mere list of citations and references, but rather something central and vital to any serious understanding of the myth. LookingGlass (talk) 06:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)