This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't there be some mention of the scandal involving Publius Clodius Pulcher here?
Given that Clodius entered an all-female ceremony, disguised as a woman, I would think that he desecrated, rather than consecrated, the ceremony. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.73.1.1 ( talk) 16:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC).
While the article mentions the rites on December 4, it does not explains the festival of the Bona Dea taken place on May 1. Could someone expand that topic? Thanks in advance. Pichote ( talk) 20:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Seriously? Why should a virginal goddess be represented with phallic symbols? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.156.125 ( talk) 09:04, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
One of Ulrich's lovers in the modernist masterpiece The Man Without Qualities (by Robert Musil), is called Bonadea.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alordslums ( talk • contribs) 11:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Should have placed this note some time ago. I've been sprucing up here, and just noticed the complete absence of Origins and Mythology sections. And whatnot. I plan to fix the worst of those deficits sometime today but please go ahead yerself, regardless, or feel free to nag me about it. Haploidavey ( talk) 13:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Davey, I see you're still at active work on this. You didn't ask for opinions, unless that TMI? in your last edit summary can be taken as such, but I think the introductory section is too long and detailed in proportion to the article; intros need to be a "quick read," in my view. So here are my suggestions:
Anyway, I just feel that if the intro provides TMI the article can start to feel redundant or repetitive. Or maybe I feel this way because in working on Pluto (mythology) it started to seem recursive and so far I've lacked the will to fix it. Cynwolfe ( talk) 15:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Fauna (goddess) redirects to this article, as of... I can't figure out when, but fairly recently. Fauna now has no article of her own. Poor Fauna. We can't imply that she is Bona Dea (or vice versa). They should not be synthesised. I don't know how to undo the redirect and restore the original article, stub or whatever it was, 'cuz I'm inept. Can anyone oblige? Haploidavey ( talk) 22:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
At the risk of being boring: Macrobius does not state that. If you spend a minute reading the poor guy you shall discover many important things, namely:
1. Macrobius speaks of B. D. in the the context of his exposition on the etymomlogy of the months. (All of cahpter XII).
2. He starts speaking of May at paragraph 16.
3. He gives various etymologies : a. Fulvius Nobilior's that Maius is from the division of the Romans made by Romulus between elder and younger. b. that the name came from the people of Tusculum who call Iuppiter Maius because of his majesty. c. Cingius's view that the name stems from Maia wife of Vulcanus on the grounds of the sacrifice made by the flamen Vulcanalis on the kalendae of May. Piso though says she is Maiestas. d. other say Maia is the mother of Mercury (cf. the feriae of Mercury). e.Cornelius Labeo and other say that this Maia to whom sacrifice is held on the (kal.) of May is the earth named Mater Magna because of her greatness. Which is conforted by the sacrifice of a pregnant saw. Mercury is added because earth gives the voice to the newborn.
Now here is the most relevant passage: "Cornelius L. says that an aedes was dedicated to Maia, id est earth, on the kalendae of May under the name of Bona Dea. And confirms one can be taught that in the more occult rite this Bona Dea was one and the same with the earth. The same Bona Dea is invoked as Bona Fauna Op(i)s and Fatua in the pontifical books. Bona because she gives us all the wealth of food; Fauna because she benefits everything to the living beings; Opis since life is grounded in her support; fatua a fando because the newborn do not emit voice til they touch her." Note: Vettius Praetextatus is speaking here, Macrobius would not put in the mouth of the most renowned expert of pontifical law and hierofans silly statements.
Now where is it said that Bona Dea is a Greek deity, a Damia imported from Tarentum? If one reads the texts with no prejudice it is clear that she is an entity of earliest Roman religion as an alter ego of Maia, at least at the formation of the calendar. That the earliest Roman religion may have been influenced by Greek religious lore is admissible, even Dea Dia and the ritual of the Arvals that predates Rome perhaps was. But that is another issue. Aldrasto11 ( talk) 12:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the insistence, I wish just to complete my former post, I forgot the conclusion. What in my view matters in Macrobius 's passage is the clear precedence of Maia in the relationship between Maia and Bona Dea. She might well have been introduced at later times i.e. from the passage itself she could be an interpretation or even a conflation of 2 entities, one of whom Greek, However Macrobius does not say this explicitly and it is speculative that he may have implied it. The passage shows that the underlying calendarial structure is undoubtedly preformed and it is as Maia, i.e. because of Maia's own characters themselves that she can absorbe Bona Dea, whoever the last is. I thank you for the Festus citation, I wondered whence Dumezil had got this idea of the Damia. Aldrasto11 ( talk) 12:00, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure matters remain outstanding in the posts above but I'm here to explain my deletion of a passage (cited to a minor museum guidebook) that linked an Umbrian goddess, Capra/Cupra (sv) to Bona Dea. Our unreferenced article on Cupra has an external link to the Thalia.com website; this makes the same connection. A reading of Antonaccio and Neils, 1995, p. 270 [2] suggests that this stems from the late 19th cent. scholar Roscher, who perhaps made overmuch of Varro's derivation of Cyprius/Ciprius from Ciprus, which he (Varro) explains as bonus (in Lingua Latina, 5.159). A few (a very few) modern scholarly sources at least mention the argument, but I can find none to confirm its conclusions. The case for any connection seems vanishingly slight, thus the deletion. Haploidavey ( talk) 20:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Now the article attributes to Macrobius the series of epithets which connects Maia and Bona Dea. It should be stated clearly that the epithets were indigitamenta from the books of the pontiffs, divulged by the noted scholar Cornelius Labeo ("auctor est C. L. ...."). Aldrasto11 ( talk) 14:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Brouwer's 1989 book apparently overlooks some essential matters. The French publication whose author points this out is linked overleaf & gives details of cult around the Adriatic, especially in Aquillea. Haploidavey ( talk) 10:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't there be some mention of the scandal involving Publius Clodius Pulcher here?
Given that Clodius entered an all-female ceremony, disguised as a woman, I would think that he desecrated, rather than consecrated, the ceremony. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.73.1.1 ( talk) 16:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC).
While the article mentions the rites on December 4, it does not explains the festival of the Bona Dea taken place on May 1. Could someone expand that topic? Thanks in advance. Pichote ( talk) 20:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Seriously? Why should a virginal goddess be represented with phallic symbols? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.156.125 ( talk) 09:04, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
One of Ulrich's lovers in the modernist masterpiece The Man Without Qualities (by Robert Musil), is called Bonadea.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alordslums ( talk • contribs) 11:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Should have placed this note some time ago. I've been sprucing up here, and just noticed the complete absence of Origins and Mythology sections. And whatnot. I plan to fix the worst of those deficits sometime today but please go ahead yerself, regardless, or feel free to nag me about it. Haploidavey ( talk) 13:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Davey, I see you're still at active work on this. You didn't ask for opinions, unless that TMI? in your last edit summary can be taken as such, but I think the introductory section is too long and detailed in proportion to the article; intros need to be a "quick read," in my view. So here are my suggestions:
Anyway, I just feel that if the intro provides TMI the article can start to feel redundant or repetitive. Or maybe I feel this way because in working on Pluto (mythology) it started to seem recursive and so far I've lacked the will to fix it. Cynwolfe ( talk) 15:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Fauna (goddess) redirects to this article, as of... I can't figure out when, but fairly recently. Fauna now has no article of her own. Poor Fauna. We can't imply that she is Bona Dea (or vice versa). They should not be synthesised. I don't know how to undo the redirect and restore the original article, stub or whatever it was, 'cuz I'm inept. Can anyone oblige? Haploidavey ( talk) 22:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
At the risk of being boring: Macrobius does not state that. If you spend a minute reading the poor guy you shall discover many important things, namely:
1. Macrobius speaks of B. D. in the the context of his exposition on the etymomlogy of the months. (All of cahpter XII).
2. He starts speaking of May at paragraph 16.
3. He gives various etymologies : a. Fulvius Nobilior's that Maius is from the division of the Romans made by Romulus between elder and younger. b. that the name came from the people of Tusculum who call Iuppiter Maius because of his majesty. c. Cingius's view that the name stems from Maia wife of Vulcanus on the grounds of the sacrifice made by the flamen Vulcanalis on the kalendae of May. Piso though says she is Maiestas. d. other say Maia is the mother of Mercury (cf. the feriae of Mercury). e.Cornelius Labeo and other say that this Maia to whom sacrifice is held on the (kal.) of May is the earth named Mater Magna because of her greatness. Which is conforted by the sacrifice of a pregnant saw. Mercury is added because earth gives the voice to the newborn.
Now here is the most relevant passage: "Cornelius L. says that an aedes was dedicated to Maia, id est earth, on the kalendae of May under the name of Bona Dea. And confirms one can be taught that in the more occult rite this Bona Dea was one and the same with the earth. The same Bona Dea is invoked as Bona Fauna Op(i)s and Fatua in the pontifical books. Bona because she gives us all the wealth of food; Fauna because she benefits everything to the living beings; Opis since life is grounded in her support; fatua a fando because the newborn do not emit voice til they touch her." Note: Vettius Praetextatus is speaking here, Macrobius would not put in the mouth of the most renowned expert of pontifical law and hierofans silly statements.
Now where is it said that Bona Dea is a Greek deity, a Damia imported from Tarentum? If one reads the texts with no prejudice it is clear that she is an entity of earliest Roman religion as an alter ego of Maia, at least at the formation of the calendar. That the earliest Roman religion may have been influenced by Greek religious lore is admissible, even Dea Dia and the ritual of the Arvals that predates Rome perhaps was. But that is another issue. Aldrasto11 ( talk) 12:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the insistence, I wish just to complete my former post, I forgot the conclusion. What in my view matters in Macrobius 's passage is the clear precedence of Maia in the relationship between Maia and Bona Dea. She might well have been introduced at later times i.e. from the passage itself she could be an interpretation or even a conflation of 2 entities, one of whom Greek, However Macrobius does not say this explicitly and it is speculative that he may have implied it. The passage shows that the underlying calendarial structure is undoubtedly preformed and it is as Maia, i.e. because of Maia's own characters themselves that she can absorbe Bona Dea, whoever the last is. I thank you for the Festus citation, I wondered whence Dumezil had got this idea of the Damia. Aldrasto11 ( talk) 12:00, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure matters remain outstanding in the posts above but I'm here to explain my deletion of a passage (cited to a minor museum guidebook) that linked an Umbrian goddess, Capra/Cupra (sv) to Bona Dea. Our unreferenced article on Cupra has an external link to the Thalia.com website; this makes the same connection. A reading of Antonaccio and Neils, 1995, p. 270 [2] suggests that this stems from the late 19th cent. scholar Roscher, who perhaps made overmuch of Varro's derivation of Cyprius/Ciprius from Ciprus, which he (Varro) explains as bonus (in Lingua Latina, 5.159). A few (a very few) modern scholarly sources at least mention the argument, but I can find none to confirm its conclusions. The case for any connection seems vanishingly slight, thus the deletion. Haploidavey ( talk) 20:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Now the article attributes to Macrobius the series of epithets which connects Maia and Bona Dea. It should be stated clearly that the epithets were indigitamenta from the books of the pontiffs, divulged by the noted scholar Cornelius Labeo ("auctor est C. L. ...."). Aldrasto11 ( talk) 14:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Brouwer's 1989 book apparently overlooks some essential matters. The French publication whose author points this out is linked overleaf & gives details of cult around the Adriatic, especially in Aquillea. Haploidavey ( talk) 10:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)