Talk:Psychopomp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Religion / Interfaith  (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Interfaith work group.
 
WikiProject Death (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Merger[edit]

Suggest merger with Death (Personification), since that page essentially contains the same and more detailed information. List might be more useful as part of wikiList feature. Psychopomp can be included as a subcategory in Death (Personification), in my opinion.67.161.66.2 (talk) 04:34, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that's a bad idea. It would be like merging Angel with God. Separate concepts. Brodo (talk) 13:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

"African"[edit]

Is pretty big for a single entry in the "by mythology or belief system" section. Maybe add "Yoruba" for Yoruba-specific deities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.7.68 (talk) 05:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Something to remember[edit]

Psychopomp = escorter. Not death god, not death judge, just death escort. 24.126.199.129 01:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

... which would seem to be clear from reading the article, no?

Artemis and original research[edit]

Given the definition of psychopomp that appears at the top of this article, I am puzzled that the Greek section lists Artemis rather than Charon. Is this a case of the latter doing the real work while a divine middle manager takes the credit? -- Alan Peakall 18:24 Dec 10, 2002 (UTC)

Charon doesn't actually escort anybody to the Afterlife, he just takes them across the river into Hades proper. With that said, it's certainly debatable if he counts as a psychopomp or not, though I'd be inclined to say no unless I see an authoritative source define him as such, but I wouldn't remove it if you added him. Artemis is more confusing -- I'm the one that made the list and added her -- and, honestly, I don't know why she is considered one, but I created the list by doing a search for "psychopomp" on google and adding whoever came up, described as one. If I remember correctly, Artemis is believed to have been worshipped extensively in really ancient Greece and her function was slightly different, so I'm guessing she was originally a psychopomp, though Hermes fulfilled that role during the classical period of Greek mythology. I could certainly be wrong about all this, but I think that's why the list is as it is. Tokerboy 20:19 Dec 10, 2002 (UTC)
lol. You know that's a clear cut case of ORIGINAL RESEARCH, right? Charon ferried the dead across, but the main psychopomp of Greek mythology was Hermes. I think "Artemis" was just bad data. 24.126.199.129 00:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

psychopomps[edit]

Reckon someone should make a page for 'pyschopomps' that redirects to the psychopomp page. Or maybe I should actually bother to learn how to really edit this site and just do it myself... but I haven't touched html in years and I have some papers to finish. cheers.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.233.68.47 (talk)

Japanese shinigami[edit]

Does shinigami belong to this list? It's simply Japan's name for the imported Grim Reaper; it's more of a pop culture figure than a mythological one. O not 01:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wade[edit]

I'm unsure why Wade (or Waetle) is listed as an English Psychopomp. I've not seen anything that even likens him to Charon, although he is associated with fords and rivers. His page on Wikipedia doesn't mention anything. The English equivalent of Valkries are Wælcyrge according to Ellis Davidson, H. R. "Gods and Myths of Northern Europe". They are most definately Psychopomps, their name meaning "choosers of the slain". Having also read the Norse section, why are Odin (certainly NOT just a death escorter) and Baldr (dead, living in Hel, and unable to return) listed? --Swahilli (talk) 22:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

All mythology[edit]

If we're going to use the term mythology, even to describe modern religions, should we not also use something like "Jewish Mythology" instead of "Judaism"? It seems to me like it'd match the rest of the article better, and is not particularly offensive or inaccurate - JustinWick (talk) 09:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Being a mythologist that's fine with me, but do know that some religious observers are not very comfortable with associating their religious "beliefs" with the term "mythology."

USA12345 keeps removing the Jewish and Christian sections claiming they aren't mythology or that by putting them in here violates WP:NPOV. I don't think there is a POV issue as evidenced by my reverts of his edits. I was hoping we could get a consensus on this. Personally I think that since it states in the first sentence that Psychopomps are part of religious beliefs that there is a NPOV. sdgjake (talk) 20:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I, on the other hand, think there is a POV issue since the article itself states that it is about the mythology of the psychopomp. Even though the article does refer in passing to belief systems, its content is 99% mythology and gives the impression that anything included in the page is mythological. Moreover, it belies a distinct POV to argue that an angel in Judaism or Christianity is in the same category ("psychopomp") as Charon or any other mythological being, since the category itself has a profoundly mythological/fictional connotation. -- USA12345 —Preceding unsigned comment added by USA12345 (talkcontribs) 20:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The problem is, why are we being selective about which modern religions to include (e.g., Hinduism and Islam) and which to exclude (Christianity and Judaism)? Consistency is important, and I agree with Sdgjake's assessment that the intro properly scopes it as religious beliefs being part of it. —C.Fred (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Further, the article stated it was about the religious term. I have recast the otheruses heading and, pursuant to the section saying mythologies or belief systems, changed the obvious extant religions (i.e., Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism) to delete mythology from their section headers. Hopefully this shows the broadness of the article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm on board with Fred's revision, I think it's a good one; my only remaining reservation is with the inclusion of Jesus in the Christianity category since the article states that the psychopomp does NOT judge, whereas in Christianity, Jesus judges the dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by USA12345 (talkcontribs) 16:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Good point! The definition of psychopomp does exclude Jesus. —C.Fred (talk) 17:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

The problem we have is a language problem. Myth accurately describes what we are talking about here, regardless of religion. It is the proper term. Unfortunately people who are unschooled in these things get stuck on the idea of myth meaning falsehood, exacerbated by the prejudice that allows them to believe that everyone else's religion is a myth (falsehood) but theirs is "true" and should not be so described, or that all religion is falsehood "myth." But that's not a hangup we need to get caught up in. Calling something Myth is a technical term, not a declaration of falsehood, and is accurate here. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 01:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

contested statement removed[edit]

  • [Inclusion of] Yama {{Fact|date=December 2006}}

Please do not return this information to the article without a citation.--BirgitteSB 15:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Mithras[edit]

This article lists Mithra as a psychopomp, but Mithra says "Unlike Sraosha, Mithra is not however a psychopomp." Attys (talk) 13:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Xolotl[edit]

This article lists Xolotl as a psychopomp, but Xolotl says: "Although often depicted in relation to the underworld, Xolotl was not a psychopomp in the Western sense." Attys (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Toth, Horus, Namtar[edit]

I am in no way an expert on Psychopomps, but considering the definition at the start of the article some names seem missplaced. Toth was said to judge the dead, not guide them to the afterlife, which according to the definition given means he is not a Psychopomp. Horus also seems to have little cause to be called a Psychopomp, the same with Namtar who is closly connected to death but as far as I know not of guiding the dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.96.132.12 (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Image caption (Myrrhine)[edit]

Hello, I'm just wondering if the Myrrhine referred to in the image caption refers to a single individual? And is it the same as this Myrrhine? Thank you! --TyrS (talk) 06:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Removed "In Fiction" section[edit]

The "In Fiction" section contained 10 to 20 paragraphs where people stuffed in personal opinions about their favorite TV shows, books, etc., all without any citations (actually, there was 1 almost irrelevant cite at the very end.)

I improved the article by just nuking the entire section. It was tangential to the topic at best. Nandesuka (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)