Talk:Ouroboros

message: Hmmmm, is it cool that someone did the linakge to that program and put their email address in the article and such? Just asking if that is in general permissible activity.
--Ouroboros 08:08, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The link to the program is fine, it's a legitimate external link. That mail link needs to go, which I'm doing right now. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:57, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Program link

message: In the Silent Hill game, there is yet another reference to mysticism and the occult and demonology.  In order to open the final door before confronting the demon Samael, you have to place the Disk of Ouroboros in the door, along with the Crest of Mercury, Dagger of Melchior, Ankh, and the Amulet of Solomon.  I just thought it was funny how many religious and occult references there were in this game.  By the way, it was quite a good game.
Additionally, in City of Heroes/City of Villians, the new update (issue 11) features the ability to travel back in time to take on old missions, and the company that allows this is called Ouroboros.
71.67.254.249 (talk) 06:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Another reference to Ouroboros

message: Interesting thought inspired by the reference to the Oroborus being inspired by the Milky Way. Has anyone noticed how ancient symbols often have counterparts in science? The carbon atom is a round circle like the Oroborus and the Double Helix of DNA corresponds to the double snake on the staff of Hermes.
Well I thought it was interesting.
:Seems like coincidence to me.  And it's a bit of nonsense to describe carbon atoms in terms of shapes, given current theories of quantum mechanics.  Citizen Premier 06:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "...believed to have been inspired by the Milky Way, as some ancient texts refer to a serpent of light residing in the heavens." Sounds like northern lights to me.  Jakob  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.208.224.151 (talk) 12:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Milky way

message: The overview if a Ouroboros on Wiki and the link I posted have extremely similar statements. 
Infringement?
:Not unless there are direct sentences copied out of it--although it is also possible that they copied us.  I'm a bit too lazy to look see if there are any sentences repeated, but at the front it doesn't look like it.  Citizen Premier 20:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of the information given is really general and could have come from anywhere. The article just needs a lot of work to give it an identity of its own. --DanielCD 21:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://www.crystalinks.com/ouroboros.html 

message: Is it worth mentioning that symbolicaly ouroboros is the exact oposite of the Caduceus which stands for fixed points, beginging and end --82.45.120.125 02:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, if that's so. I'll try to find it. Have a reference? --DanielCD 14:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its mentioned in the anime Full Metal Alchemist, i will search for something more solid. --82.42.191.189 18:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mentioned in passing as linked symbols The two symbols used together in meditation This one seems a bit more solid mentioing their duel uses in Alchemy None of these links (Grabbed from a quick google search) Back up the two symbols being polar oposites however there were numerous mentions of being used in alchemy together. The only direct link that supports anon ips question is this wikipedia entry on a full metal alchemist charecter so im gonna say dont put it in, the polar oposites thing looks like two symbols that look similar and are both used in alchemy were grabbed in this anime by the makers just for a plot point and there is no genuine real world link.--Seth Turner 18:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caduceus 

message: Added the "e" to "psych"...I'm pretty sure "psyche" was the intended word. --Stationwagontodd 18:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, it was. --DanielCD 19:14, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psych(e) 

message: I will continue to prune the less-relevant examples from the article as they trickle in, as this is not meant to be a collection of every mention of the term or concept. It should be mentioned if it gives some light on the definition of what the Ouroboros is, not just because it uses the name or symbol. --DanielCD 02:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples

message: Can we be 100% sure on the Christian thing, cause I can't find any other sites that say that this is a Christian symbol. --Slash's snakepit 03:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know of it being a Christian symbol. If the article says it is, and doesn't provide a reference, I'd take it out. --DanielCD 05:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian thing 

message: I will continue to prune the less-relevant examples from the article as they trickle in, as this is not meant to be a collection of every mention of the term or concept. It should be mentioned if it gives some light on the definition of what the Ouroboros is, not just because it uses the name or symbol. 
We need a separate article for the examples as they have taken the article over and make it really confusing. --DanielCD 19:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Please limit the examples to relevant material

message: The Ouroboros is one of the symbols used by Thulsa Doom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.210.96 (talk • contribs) 
I don't think that's related enough. Similar maybe, but not the same. --DanielCD 15:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Serpent Cult in Conan the Barbarian movie

message: Google shows this to be another spelling variant! Ludvikus 00:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Oroboro]]

message: On the page snake at the bottom it says that the ouroboros symbol is clockwise from the head to the tail.  What does this mean?  And there are various pictures on the ouroboros article of snakes, and there is an equal number of snakes facing one way as there is facing the other.  Which is it? Mooski Magnus 01:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which way? 

message: In particular, many fans want to mention that the homunculi in Fullmetal Alchemist have O. tattoos.  My inclination (tacitly supported so far, it seems) is to delete such entries as many times as it takes, until someone sees fit to mention why it's a hoop-snake and not any of an infinite number of other symbols which, so far as one can know without having seen the show, would be equally suitable.  —Tamfang (talk) 00:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fullmetal Alchemist

message: The article says that "in some Hindu folk-myths, [the ouroboros is present] as the dragon circling the tortoise that supports the four elephants which support the world on their backs". Is that really Hindu myth? Not many pages on the internet supporting this are of much credit. It seems to be in fact a reference to a joke by Stephen Hawking in his book A Brief History of Time, or Terry Pratchett's Discworld series which contains itself lots of jokes on Stephen Hawking's books (See Turtles all the way down).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.19.78.161 (talk • contribs) 
:That same article cites a mention of this as a Hindu myth from a lecture by Bertrand Russell, directly below the Hawking quote.  This myth is also mentioned on this page, giving "Cobb, Kelton, 2005, The Blackwell Guide to Theology and Popular Culture, Blackwell Publishing, " as a citation.  I also found the statement dubious, but I am convinced now.  Any objections to removing the tag? -Elmer Clark 20:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcaudilllg (talk • contribs) 03:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four elephants on the back of a turtle 

message: file: "ouroboros.php"
<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">

</style>
<title>infinite divs</title>
</head>
<body>

<?php
include ("ouroboros.php")
?>

</body>
</html>
Get it? :]
:This is a place for discussing improvements for the given article, not for posting "clever" code tricks. Besides, this is just a basic example of infinite recursion as opposed to something truly infinite. This code has a definite start but no end (although technically the interpreter should stop after a certain depth of including the same file, otherwise it will never complete processing and never render). The symbol has neither a true start or end as the end is going into (or coming out of, depending how you look at it) the head. MerlinYoda (talk) 16:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  PHP ouroboros 

message: The famous ouroboros drawing from the early alchemical text The Chrysopoeia of Cleopatra dating to 2nd century Alexandria encloses the words hen to pan, "one, the all", i.e. "All is One". Its black and white halves represent the Gnostic duality of existence.
This sounds interesting. Can we get an image of this, if it's so 'famous'? Failing that, does anyone have a link to an image on the web?Avnas Ishtaroth (talk) 04:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chrysopoeia of Cleopatra 

message: What's the plural of ouroboros?Avnas Ishtaroth (talk) 11:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Ouroboroses"? Although, I don't think there's much call for a plural as it isn't technically associated with an actual physical thing. It's more a symbol associated with an idea. It's kinda like having a plural for "Love" or "Time".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MerlinYoda (talk • contribs) 16:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there was a concept of anything other than One ouroboros. As I understand ancient Greek, if the singular ends with -os, than the plural would be -oi, ie Ouroboroi. MegX (talk) 03:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Unless it's a consonant-stem noun (in which case the plural might be -otes or –odes), but I see no reason to think that. —Tamfang (talk) 01:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

text: Even if it is a consonant-stem noun, and even if you're right about how those plurals are formed, you're just showing off without knowing the answer.  Be gone.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.122 (talk) 07:02, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Just like scissors. USchick (talk) 02:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

text: The word is used in the text as plural: "The Ouroboros often symbolize" - so, is this correct, should it read "The Ouroboros often symbolizes" -- or what?211.225.33.104 (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plural 

message: Was Jung a psychoanalyst? Carl Jung says he was a psychiatrist. Hyacinth (talk) 20:36, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Jung

message: The origin story of this temple decoration is very similar to ouroboros: a demon which consumes itself, ending up as a symbol adorning temple gates to represent the basic nature of existence and upon which spiritual development also ultimately rests (in its traditional sense). I suggest a link to the article on Kirthimukha, if its origin story is ever referenced there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.150.54 (talk) 02:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already a kirtimukha page Kirtimukha. Note the different spelling. I tried to add the reference and it got removed as spam :-(
Rpm13 (talk) 16:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Kirthimukha

message: I know that the ouroboros is incredibly tightly tied to Kundalini, a spiritual energy that rests at *the tailbone* and *snakes* *up the spine* (releasing at *the head* or *cycling back* down the front of the body), but I don't have especially direct references to hand, does anyone else?  With that relationship in place, the link to the caduceus is far less wobbly (the caduceus is a map of the energy channels involved during the kundalini ascension - the two spiralling snakes are the ida and pingala channels, the central rod is the spinal susumna, and the resulting fusion takes place in the region of the winged third eye / ajna chakra). K2709 (talk) 09:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's a kundalini thing 

message: Just wondering, why isn't there any mention of the two featured in the NES (Never Ending Story)? I don't know if they appear in the stupid movie version of the NES, but they are mentioned several times in the book, and, while their role isn't the most prominent one in the story, they end up being very symbolical towards the end of it. The NES one is of two snakes eating each other, one black, one white, and they represent some kind of symbiosis between the 'real world' and Fantasia. 66.25.254.123 (talk) 21:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never Ending Story 

message: The cited sources say that "Creation begins with the transition from unity to duality" and that "the entrance of the god at night into the body of Nut is equated with sexual union." They have nothing whatsoever to do with claims of "The main attribute of nocturnal dreams is reality warping" (and what does a comic-book superhero have to do with this?) or "the death of the vernal sun of Aries/Lamb (Christ)..." or most of the other claims being made. Even minus these more exceptional claims, there is nothing in the sources that mention or draw parallels with the Ouroboros image - that appears to be just the editor's interpretation. Ergative rlt (talk) 23:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent anon edits 

message: People can not search Two Headed Snake or similar terms to find this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.245.59 (talk) 02:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  two headed snake 

message: I've removed the painting of the mostly-nude woman. I saw no way in which it could possibly even remotely illustrate this topic. If someone puts it back, please provide an appropriate caption to explain its significance.
Even if it is remotely related, it doesn't make for a good lead illustration, since it doesn't convey the topic of the article at all. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs)  23:45, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I put it back with an extended caption, since it does show Ouroboros. It could use some explanation of the symbolism in context, which is given in the reference. I agree that in general a lead image should try to show primarily the specific subject, but the problem is that no individual image is the Ouroboros. (See commons:Category:Ouroboros.) Given this, I think an illustration that shows a particular symbolic use is acceptable. Feezo (Talk) 01:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. While I by no means endorse it (especially as a lead), its use makes more sense to me now.  Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs)  03:12, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

text: I've added  as the lead image, as I think it most effectively illustrates the characteristic depiction of the Ouroboros.  The painting is moved further down the page to give an example of symbolic use. 164.55.254.106 (talk) 22:19, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nicely done! It's simple and clearly conveys the meaning, without being specific to a particular culture. I do have to add that while I agree with changing the image, I found Bob's description of the original picture (the 15th century Allegoria della vita umana) as "pornographic" somewhat inappropriate. It's perfectly acceptable to remove images that do not appear to to be relevant, but such language is needlessly inflammatory. Feezo (Talk) 23:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Much thanks for that! Also-- seeing as how nudity was not necessary in representing the subject (and it's not like it wasn't the focus of the image), I don't think my diagnosis of its nature was completely off-base. Had the article even been about art in that period or something related to the painting, I would not have referred to it as such. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs)  00:34, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Painting 

message: Many of these items are trivial, giving no insight into Ouroboros. An entry should at the very least explain the use of the symbol, what it represents, and ideally the significance of its appearance in the work. A number of the entries do none of these, and hence I am going to remove them. Feezo (Talk) 06:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any consensus for restoring the section, so I'm going to remove it again. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 18:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ouroboros#Modern]] 

message: I was asked about problems in the Egypt section of this article at WT:WikiProject Ancient Egypt#Atum equivalent to Scorpio?. I found that the section was riddled with synthesis; the statements had references, some of them reliable, but the individual statements were strung together in such a way as to suggest connections that the sources did not. Most of the section talked about the god Atum, who is connected with the ouroboros but is not necessarily synonymous with it. Most of the references mentioned Atum but not the ouroboros. One portion equated the constellation Scorpio with Atum, when the reference said only that the Egyptians saw a serpent constellation (no mention of Atum or the ouroboros) in the same area of the sky as the Greco-Roman Scorpio. To me, it looked like a tangled web of esoteric speculation, putting unwarranted mystical interpretations on ancient Egyptian belief.
That old section was such a mess that I rewrote it entirely, using only the sources that I have on hand: three books by Erik Hornung. It was minimal and could have used some fleshing out, but at least it was free of synthesis and esoterica. But the anonymous user 89.110.17.197 restored the old text, declaring my version "hopelessly inane and unsourced". I'm not sure exactly what "inane" was supposed to mean in this case; there's always the risk that text won't look as coherent to the reader as it does to the writer. But to say that what I wrote was unsourced is simply wrong.
The IP proceeded to rework and expand the Egypt section. The same problematic text remains, although it's been rearranged a bit, and still more has been added. Just because the Latin word penis also means "tail" does not mean that a Greek phrase meaning "tail in mouth" refers to autofellatio. Just because Egyptian mythology involves autofellatio does not mean that the ouroboros is connected with autofellatio. The statement that Atum is Scorpio is only very tenuously supported by its source, and the statement that Khepri is Aries has no support at all. No source supports the speculation that the Egyptians chose a serpent as a symbol of eternity because it has less bilateral symmetry than other creatures. Above all, no source with any credibility would say Osiris is equivalent to God the Son and Atum is equivalent to God the Father.
Anyone defending this version of the Egypt section needs to take a serious look at WP:No original research and especially WP:Synthesis. A. Parrot (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I've just reverted again to remove the original research. Dougweller (talk) 11:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Egypt section 

message: Looking at discussions above which took place over the past years, no one seems to see a reason for a section on Christianity. None of the sources in this section mention the Ouroboros, which makes it original research. And what is Judeo-Christianity anyway? Whoever thought of that subject heading perhaps didn't have English as their first language, as it seems to mean a type of Christianity.
Please don't restore the section without reliable sources discussing the Ouroboros. And anyone who does needs to think of a better section heading. But from the looks of the discussion above, others have tried to source it but failed. Dougweller (talk) 17:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Whoever thought of that subject heading perhaps didn't have English as their first language, as it seems to mean a type of Christianity." Who could have thought that you are capable of original research, Dougweller! Steady as you go, wikipedo! —91.122.4.153 (talk) 14:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that you aren't going to discuss whether this is original research, but just edit war to get your edits in the article. Please stop this. Dougweller (talk) 16:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

text: So far as I'm concerned, yes. If anyone finds reliable sources discussing the Ouroboros and either Christianity or Judaism a new section can probably be created (with a different section heading of course). Thanks for your RPP request. Dougweller (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Judeo-Christianity" - section was original research 

message: As someone with an advanced philosophy degree and Plato teaching experience, I am pretty sure that what Plato is talking about in that excerpt from Timaeus is not an Ouroboros. For one thing, the word is not used in Timaeus. But for another, the being described is clearly spherical, and not circular. 
As far as further interpretation goes, this extract occurs in a portion of the dialogue in which Timaeus is describing the *entire universe* as a living creation of the Demiurge, not a particular entity within the universe. The references to sphericity, a lack of features and a complete self-sufficiency are intended to demonstrate the wholeness of the universe and how all elements are included within it, sort of a proto-mass/energy conservation idea.
-Matthew Weflen, M.A., Instructor at Wilbur Wright College (Chicago)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.156.41 (talk) 08:53, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plato section not germane 

message: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJYWziStNzs  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.246.167.50 (talk) 08:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: In reality

message: The chemist  Kekule claimed that a dream of Ouroboros helped him to realize and explain the structure of benzene.  Ouroboros is already cross-linked at the  Kekule page.  Should Kekule be mentioned and cross-referenced here, in the Main Article? AdderUser (talk) 05:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Friedrich_August_Kekul%C3%A9_von_Stradonitz | Kekule]] and the structure of [[benzene]]? 

message: :===Non-western traditions===
:Some Hindu folk-myths have a snake (Adisesha) circling the tortoise Kurma that supports the eight elephants which support the world on their backs. However, the snake does not bite its own tail, but instead is calling itself into being through what some literary theorists have called a performative speech act.
:Snakes are sacred in many West African religions.  The demi-god Aidophedo uses the image of a serpent biting its own tail. The Ouroboros is also seen in Fon or Dahomean iconography as well as in Yoruba imagery as Oshunmare.
:The god Quetzalcoatl is sometimes portrayed biting its tail on Aztec and Toltec ruins. A looping Quetzalcoatl is carved into the base of the Pyramid of the Feathered Serpent, at Xochicalco, Mexico, 700–900 A.D.
:A map from the late Tokugawa Era named "Jishin-no-ben" has an Ouroborous encircling an area of Japan to explain the cyclic nature of earthquakes.
It's really not hard to verify this stuff.  Type "Xochicalco Quetzalcoatl" into Google Images.  Pointless impoverishment of the article. 92.30.23.198 (talk) 08:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you provide references (other than google image) then I will support its insertion. Because Wikipedia should represent worldviews, currently it seems to be devoted to Western World Views and interest with a hostility to others. --Inayity (talk) 13:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recently removed 

message: Is it sensible to allow citations that contradict accepted history? I question the validity of the assertion that the Albigensians may have been active in Mediaeval history much beyond the mid-13th Century, when the siege of Montségur effectively ended their existence. Surely the Albigensians were themselves consigned to history long before the 15th Century quoted in the article. Also, the accepted history of Tarot cards has them emerging first in the mid-15th Century, long after the Albigensians had ceased to exist. Isn't the Ouroboros article in danger of re-writing history? --DStanB (talk) 10:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It was added at  by an IP and then various changes were made. Bayley isn't a reliable source - he was a student of the occult and a theosophist.  "Fifteenth Century Playing Cards and Manuscripts" doesn't mention any of this - I'm assuming we were supposed to use the editor's interpretation of an image as a source. Another source, The Illuminatus! Trilogy, is " a satirical, postmodern, science fiction-influenced adventure story; a drug-, sex-, and magic-laden trek through a number of conspiracy theories, both historical and imaginary, related to the authors' version of the Illuminati." The Tarot: History, Symbolism, and Divination is ok for tarot cards and could be used, but the rest, no. I've deleted the whole paragraph. Dougweller (talk) 17:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middle Ages section 

message: "Figurative use" section is too much interesting to be deleted. Don't need to be referenced when it's about media content because anybody can see the content on TV or Internet.
:A reference is more than just a primary source. Has a secondary source documented (for example) how Ouroboros' appearance in a particular TV show affected its perception in modern culture? See discussion here and here. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 03:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't remove "Figurative use" section 

message: M.C. Escher did a 1952 print called Dragon, which consists of a dragon eating its own tail (through itself); would this be appropriate to incorporate into the article? 12.218.76.10 (talk) 09:46, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Escher's Dragon? 

message: For everyone's information, the notion of the Ouroboros in India was added entirely by an IP in these edits. His source was "http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1062027032". Yes, a forum thread on David Icke's website. I don't suppose anyone objects to removing this rubbish. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 13:08, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The India material was worse than unsourced 

message: This was a fabrication by Kekule. Because he already knew the structure of benzene from his friend and colleague Loschmidt (an Austrian scientist) who had proposed the possibility of a ring structure in detail to him. But Kekule rejected the idea, only to later publish it as his own. The made up story with the snake should legitimize his plagiarism.--213.147.167.205 (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia just cites professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, we don't use original research.  Ian.thomson (talk) 17:54, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kekulé's dream 

message: I attempted to feature related terms "Mehen serpent" and "Re-Osiris-mummiform" by using a descriptive passage/analysis written by John Coleman Darnell as it seemed useful to describe something that is currently stated as: "Both serpents are manifestations of the deity Mehen, who in other funerary texts protects Ra in his underworld journey". In the article as it stands the picture of "The first known appearance" shows only the upper body of this depiction whereas the quote describes it in it's entirety. These are the issues I saw, and if anyone ideas about addressing these concerns that would be cool. 
Here was the passage I had included:
"Each composition has a large figure of Re-Osiris-mummiform on the second shrine of Tutankhamun and the enigmatic wall in the tomb of Ramesses IX, once snake-legged and once with the goddesses Isis and Nephthys forming his arms, on the Corridor G ceiling in the tomb of Ramesses VI. Although they are not identical, the great mummiform deities of the Tutankhamun and Ramesses IX treatises are further associated by the presence in front of each figure of a horizontally laid out text in Normalschrift referring to the protection of the deceased king from the noxious influences of unwanted divine messengers. The head and feet of the Tutankhamun deity are surrounded by a Mehen serpent"
https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/152643/1/Darnell_2004_The_Enigmatic_Netherworld_Books_of_the_Solar_Osirian_Unity.pdf— Preceding unsigned comment added by Flagrant hysterical curious (talk • contribs) 17:52, January 26, 2019 (UTC)
::: Related discussion occurred 26 January 2019 here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Doug_Weller/Archive_54 (Flagrant hysterical curious (talk) 12:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  terminology 

message: What is the origin of the symbol shown in the article, described as "Ouroboros swallowing its tail; based on Moskowitz's symbol for the constellation Draco"? I can't seem to find any source for this depiction. Username1230 (talk) 06:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symbol origin