Contents

Talk:Ēostre

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ēostre 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Mythology Mid‑importance 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 articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's History Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion Mid‑importance 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 articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Women in Religion Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contents of the Ēosturmōnaþ page were merged into Ēostre. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. (May 21, 2023)

Brilliant! --Yak 13:45, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The series is a book adaptation, and Eostre is already in the original book. It should be edited to refer to the book first, otherwise it's a misleading information.Monteparnas (talk) 22:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article as it currently is reads like neopagan propaganda, full of stuff with no actual connection to Eostre (who is known solely from Bede, writing in Latin, so the macrons are fake), based on "sounds like." It's been faked, essentially. Can someone purge all the crap please? The Matronae Austriahennae - a triad of mother goddesses - does not mention Eostre, and obviously one goddess is not three. It's right to report scholarly speculation. It's not right to present it as fact. Demonteddybear100 (talk) 21:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cam you humor me and cite some specific passages you think shouldn't been in the article. Saying the article's been faked is pretty inane--there's multiple citations to reliable sources in most paragraphs. Remsense 00:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Written Old English didn't have macrons -- it had the "apex" (an acute accent looking mark) which could indicate long vowels, but was not too commonly used. However, if a form has [eu] in Proto-Germanic, then by standard linguistic reconstructions it generally had a long "eo" in Old English, which is often transcribed with a macron in modern editions, without being "fake" at all. AnonMoos (talk) 03:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "Based on 'sounds like'." -- And here we have a fine example of why school systems should provide at least a brief introduction to historical linguistics. That along with a unit on source literacy would go a long way.

Anyway, this article is extensively sourced. It even contains overviews of some of the most recent (peer-reviewed) discussion available on the topic. The reality is that very few scholars today find reason to argue that Bede invented the goddess. Today discussion (where it occurs at all) instead focuses on questions like whether to take seriously Shaw's 'localized goddess' proposal. :bloodofox: (talk) 07:03, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]