Talk:Berehynia

message: Wouldn't it be more correct to call it Berehynia? On Google this spelling yields about the same number of results. --Amir E. Aharoni 17:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are right about that and we can move the article to Berehynia. --Irpen 20:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If there is a difference in opinion, reverting pages off hand is a very poor judgement call. Besides, that will never help. --Hillock65 16:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  And who exactly are you to give orders? You never even bothered to read the text, just reverted it off hand. Is this "sterile edit-warring" ? If you don't like a word or a terminology please, modify, change, add, but reverting pages point blank shows the worst case of WP:OWN and WP:BATTLE--Hillock65 16:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Berehynia?

message: Please only use sources whose reliability can be verified. Hillock added two. One was an unsigned page of the anonymous web-site. The other claims to be a dictionary but I cannot find any evidence that such dictionary was published and the even its web-site does not allow to establish its credentials. Please review WP:RS and WP:V. --Irpen 01:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This pathetic revert warring done in revenge to make a (WP:POINT) for being caught for fraudelently twisting sources here is getting tedious. The first source is an Encyclopaedia of Mythology - here is the list of literature used there: Мифология древнего мира, -М.:Белфакс, 2002 Б.А.Рыбаков «Язычество древних славян», -М.:Русское слово, 1997 В.Калашников «Боги древних славян», -М.:Белый город, 2003 Д.Гаврилов, А.Наговицын «Боги славян. Язычество. Традиция», -М.:Рефл-Бук, 2002. All very respectable publications. Second source is the Ukrainian internet portal Arrata, which publishes articles on all aspects of Ukrainian culture. The reference is taken on pagan goddess from there. There is nothing dubious about both sites. This is WP:POINT and WP:BATTLE at its worst. That is all. Hillock65 01:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please don't confuse Neo-pagan beliefs with Slavic mythology. There was no such "goddess" in Slavic mythology (actually, there were no goddesses at all). If you continue to insert the link to a website advertising proto-Ukrainian theories about their descent from Aratta and Sumer, I will have to transfer this lame dispute to Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. --Ghirla-трёп- 09:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Where on Earth did you see proto-Ukrainian theories is beyond me. There is not a single word about Arrata. NOT ONE WORD. Arrata is a name of the journal that published the article. For all I am concerned, it could have been any other name of the journal, it has no bearing on the article. Moreover, there are two sites that support that statement, the other one is an encyclopedia of Slavic mythology. Just like your edit-warring buddy Irpen, you never took the trouble to read the article. All you do is revert pages wholesale without bothering to do any other edits. To satisfy the Russian sterile edit warriors I will add another, third source to support my statement. Please do not continue to entrench your reputation of vicious edit warrior and do some constructive editing, you know, something apart from wholesale page reverts. --Hillock65 10:56, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, neo-paganist websites are disconnected from anything resembling academia and do not qualify as reliable sources for this project. --Ghirla-трёп- 11:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What are you talking about? What neo-paganist sites? Which one of the three? Please don't be rediculous. I will add the fourth one, I will be waiting for you to lable it neo-paganist as well. --Hillock65 11:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  What nationalist sites? Which one of the FOUR? Please stop your disruptive behaviour. You are evidently at a loss, what to lable them, first it was proto-Ukrainian — now nationalist. You presented a single Russian language source, which by the way does mention berehynia (дyалистический анемизм (кyльт вампиpов и беpегинь), кyльт божеств плодоpодия). In your edit warring excitement you even failed to read the source you presented, which does support the claim it was a pagan goddess, contrary to what you have written above. Please don't cite your fringe theories, other wiki or Russian natioanalist ranting, present the source that disputes the fact that it was a pagan goddess. At least one, against now FIVE sources that do claim to the contrary. And above all please stop the edit warring. Read WP:BATTLE. --Hillock65 11:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  I don't know if you can read Ukrainian, but there is a good article of Halyna Lozko (Галина Лозко) on the subject in Ukrainin in this source. And not in passing but a quite substantial research too. --Hillock65 13:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  Here is the full article.  Here she clearly states that Berehynia was one of the goddesses worshipped in Rus. (ще за трипільської доби існувала культові святилища з вівтарями й ознаками розвинутого культу Праматері Роду, яка має всі ознаки Богині (теїзм!)? --Hillock65 14:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh yeah, and proto-Ukrainians were Trypillians. --Ghirla-трёп- 15:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This has nothing to do with Ukrainians, but with the goddess claim. You are obviously running short of lables. The nationalist and neo-paganist lables do not fit this one? --Hillock65 15:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

text: The summary of Rybakov's research about these spirits is available in the article Slavic fairies. --Ghirla-трёп- 13:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: I am surprised taht some sources are discarded off hand and other unsubstianted claims are added to the text, like Ukrainian nationalism and Slavic neopaganism, none of which are supported by sources. Curiously enough the editor, who made the changes added the tag "sources" himself/herself. Why make changes and allegations if they are not supported by sources? --Hillock65 20:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: is Berehynia considered a goddess in Slavic neopaganism, or is she not? If she is not, we'll scrap the "goddess" reference altogether, since there certainly is no evidence she was a goddess in pre-Christian Slavic paganism. --dab (𒁳) 08:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am puzzled at yet another round of strange edits, in particular, which sources claim that she is considered a goddess in Slavic Neo paganism, please be specific? I am also curious where this information was obtained: Halyna Lozko, Chairwoman of Ukrainian Native Faith Pravoslavya ("Ukrainian heathenism") Pravoslavya means Orthodoxy, not paganism. She is a scientist from the Kyiv Mohyla Academy, who decided she was a chairwoman of anything? If you have a source where you took these claims from I am very curious to know. As well, of all the sources presented, none mentiones "Ukrainian romantic nationalism". I am also curious to know where exactly this claim is coming from, please be specific of its location maybe I missed it in all those sources. I will not introduce any changes in hope that thses questions will be ansewered. In conclusion let me quote from WP:SOURCE: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. [...] The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question." Thank you. --Hillock65 11:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange changes 

message: as I said, I don't read Ukrainian, but judging from this
Галина Сергіївна Лозко народилася на Миколаївщині. У 1977 році закінчила філологічний факультет Київського університету ім. Т. Г. Шевченка. Працювала вчителем української мови та літератури, викладала образотворче мистецтво. Згодом почала викладати українознавство в Київському політехнічному інституті, де писала свій курс історії української культури.
Галина Лозко є автором ряду статей з народознавства: "Етногенез та антропологія українців", "Мова і генетичний код", "Забуті праці про пеласгів", "Праукраїнський календар", "Символіка обрядового хліба", "Віра українців" та ін. Друкувалася в часописах: "Київ", "Книжник", "Українська мова і література в школі", "Народознавство", "Самостійна Україна".
В 1994 p. побачила світ її книга "Українське язичництво", видана Українським Центром Духовної Культури.
Нині Галина Лозко викладає народознавство в одному з київських вузів, а також читає лекції для вчителів, творчо працює для просвіти українського народу.
it appears she is not a "scientist" after all, but rather a philologist by education who is/was lecturing at the Kiev polytechnical institute on "history of Ukrainian culture". Again, if she has published her "Berehynia is a goddess" hypothesis in any peer-reviewed journal, we can cite it as a bona fide hypothesis, regardless of whether she is personally a neopagan. Until we have such a citation, we simply have no evidence that the "goddess" hypothesis is taken seriously in scholarship. dab (𒁳) 15:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in the above passage it states that she is indeed a scientist, she was a professor of Ukrainian folklore at the Kyiv Polytechnical institute, published several books on the subject now teaches at one of Ukrainian Universities (the other source states it is Kyiv Mohyla Academy). From what I can gather she is not a fringe maverick but a recognized academician even though she heads the neo-pagan movement. --Hillock65 16:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: right -- this is difficult to judge, since she is quite obviously lost in national mysticism. I don't put it beyond Ukrainian authorities to promote even far out ethnic-national mysticists to university positions if they just make enough noise about the glory of the nation. It will be safer to stick with the hypotheses as forwarded earlier in the 20th century, per discussion below. dab (𒁳) 16:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lozko

message: It begins to transpire that the "goddess hypothesis" was, as I presumed, first forwarded in the early 20th century. here is a google books snippet view of a 1970 author telling us that ...rodzow (first part of name truncated) in the first decades of the 20th century has shown that "Scythian mythology lives on in Russian embroidery", where Bereginya, "incarnation of Earth" is often replaced by a cosmic tree. Depending on whether we can identify this ...rodzow, here in any case is a pre-1980s reference. dab (𒁳) 15:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...rodzow is  Russian archaeologist V. A. Gorodtsov (1860-1845).  I had to guess this, because the name was separated by a linebreak in the 1970 book, but searching for "Go- rodzow" confirms it. dab (𒁳) 16:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, it is not only a Ukrainian phenomenon — the other source that I had originally is from a Russian Encyclopaedia of Mythology. About Berehynia it states the following:(Some scientists believe that the name "Bereginja" similar to the name of lightning thrower Perun and with the word "Old" pregynya-hill, bush forests.) and (Ancient Slavs thought that Bereginya is a great goddess, that created everything existing. She was escorted throughout by shining riders, crystallizing the sun. She was worshipped particularly when grain matured and is said to belong to the supreme goddess patrons of human race). (Google translation with minor changes) They cite credible published Russian language sources: Мифология древнего мира, -М.:Белфакс, 2002 Б.А.Рыбаков «Язычество древних славян», -М.:Русское слово, 1997 В.Калашников «Боги древних славян», -М.:Белый город, 2003 Д.Гаврилов, А.Наговицын «Боги славян. Язычество. Традиция», -М.:Рефл-Бук, 2002 Have a look. --Hillock65 16:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: now we are talking. I suppose based on this we can say it was hypothesized from the early 20th century (beginning with Gorodtsov) that the Berehynia water spirits had evolved out of a Scythian earth goddess. dab (𒁳) 16:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  From Lozko and from Russian sources, it appears that both notions existed among different tribes (there was no single nation) and Berehynia was indeed worshipped by some as a water fairy and by some as supreme goddess equal in status to Perun. The latter notion was picked up by Ukrainian writers in the 19th early 20th century and transformed into mother of the nation, which materialized into a monument in the centre of Kyiv. --Hillock65 16:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  Well, I maybe wrong here again, like with Lozko, but that's what all the sources say: Russian, Ukrainian and even the English one. You seem to have a far better background in this stuff then I and it very well maybe the correct hypothesis, but so far that's what it is - a hypotheses. None of the sources that are here in all the languages support the speculation theory. If I am missing a source, could you direct me to one? So far, the theory that it was developed by 20th century philologists is an unsupported POV, even if it maybe a correct one. --Hillock65 15:19, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: origin of "goddess" hypothesis

message: (moved from WP:FTN) My Ukrainian isn't too hot, to put it mildly, but from reading the Lozko page linked to at the bottom of the article, there isn't a lot about Berehynia in the primary sources from the Middle Ages and the name mostly appears there in the plural (Ім'я Берегині у формі множини згадується і в писемних христи­янських джерелах XI—XV ст.). Even Lozko seems to admit there's a difference between what she (or they) originally stood for and what she means today ( відома сьогодні як Богиня на­родної пам'яті - which, I'm guessing, means something like "seen today as a/the goddess of national memory"). So she's clearly been promoted from minor spirit to major goddess in more recent times, whether due to Romanticism, nationalism, neo-paganism or a combination of all three. --Folantin  21 September 2007 (UTC)
(reply - moved from WP:FTN) I presume this is a case of romantic "deity reconstruction" along the lines of Eostre. The difference being that for Eostre, we have a big-time 19th century academic forwarding the hypothesis, while for Berehynia, we have a bunch of online essays. I would be ever so glad if we could come up with some actual scholarship, so we could state that thbe Berehynias "have been hypothesized in 19th century scholarship to continue an earlier single mother goddess" or similar. If Lozko cites no such academic precedents of her hypothesis, however, I don't know where we should get them. dab (𒁳), 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:Expanded version of that sentence: відома сьогодні як Богиня на­родної пам'яті, яка зберігає прадавні звичаї. Presumably: "seen today as a/the goddess of national memory, who protects [probably wordplay here: зберігає/Берегиня] traditional customs"? In other words, Berehynia has become something like Halyna Lozko herself, who in her book Kolo Svarozhe  tries to reconstruct the calendar of ancient Rus', claiming "A nation, which lost its own calendar, will be lost for millennia in a darkness or slavery". --Folantin 16:23, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not sure how credible it will be, since it has been established that she is involved in neo-paganism, but in her article, she states this: У “Слові Іоанна Златоуста” Берегиня згадується один раз і виступає як ім’я власне. У Софійському збірнику 14 століття читаємо, що одні язичники поклонялися Блискавці, Грому, Сонцю і Місяцю, а інші “Перену, Хоурсу, Вилам і Мокоші, Оупирем і Берегиням, їх же нарицають три-дев’ять (27) сестриниць...а ще інші - Огневі і Каменію, і Рікам, і Істочникам, і Берегиням...”. She claims that Berehynia is mentioned as a proper (not a collective) name as early as IVth century, among other things in The Word of John Chrysostom. It appears that she was promoted to the goddess status even in Rus, before Russia or Ukraine ever appeared. That same idea is supported by Russian sources I quoted above from Encyclopaedia of Mythology. --Hillock65 16:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't entirely sure what she meant by the "Word of John Chrysostom" and the "Word of Gregory the Theologian" (i.e. Gregory of Nazianzus, also 4th century). If she's claiming "Berehynia" was mentioned in the original Greek texts, AFAIK that would be incredibly early for any reference to the Slavs. I presumed she was talking about 11th-15th century translations of/works about those theologians in (Old) Church Slavonic (which is why those mentions are preceded by Ім'я Берегині у формі множини згадується і в писемних христи­янських джерелах XI—XV ст.). --Folantin 16:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More (from [[WP:FTN]])

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Berehynia. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://ridne.com.ua/content/view/172/33/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720175022/http://www.golosiyiv.kiev.ua/observer.php?id=215 to http://www.golosiyiv.kiev.ua/observer.php?id=215
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051128082740/http://www.zerkalo-nedeli.com:80/nn/show/543/49836/ to http://www.zerkalo-nedeli.com/nn/show/543/49836/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070310140432/http://www.zn.kiev.ua:80/ie/show/543/49836/ to http://www.zn.kiev.ua/ie/show/543/49836/
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) 07:22, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified