Talk:Lernaean Hydra

message: Whose versions are being followed in this entry? Wetman 00:27, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? ··gracefool |☺ 01:16, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Miscellanea 

message: 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?
:I vaguely remember Robert Graves making such a claim in The Greek Myths.  Iapetus (talk) 13:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swamp thing 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Half-Life 2 

message: The greek word "τόξον"  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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Bow 

message: 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)
thread_title: cut text

message: 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)
thread_title:  Removed text 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Incorrect name! 

message: 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)
thread_title:  God of War + 40K 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Heracles / Hercules 

message: 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)
thread_title:  stories beyond Hercules' second labor. 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Orthrus and Echidna 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Gender? 

message: "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)
thread_title:  Nameless? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  There is no such thing as a "chthonic water beast" 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Per this edit, the usage of this page was established as American English. Kindly maintain it consistently, pending a new consensus to the contrary. — LlywelynII 08:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:ENGVAR]]

message: This page should be moved to Hydra (mythology). --Greek Legend (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: Substituted at 21:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Lernaean Hydra. 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:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150823032802/http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0130%3Acard%3D1 to http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0130%3Acard%3D1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This phrasing does not seem to be of the formal tone required for an encyclopedic style of writing. I have therefore edited this line to read "...Virgil and others did not give an exact figure." The meaning of the line has not been altered, only the tone has been changed to be more businesslike.Cloudspert (talk) 13:58, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Good. Paul August ☎ 14:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "...Virgil and others did not bother to give an exact figure." 

message: This source is difficult to find with this information alone. 174.194.142.104 (talk) 09:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Ogden 2013' reference