Talk:Gordian Knot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Cornell / dogwood =[edit]

Untitled[edit]

Is Cornell supposed to redirect to dogwood??

Not everyone can distinguish an Emblem from a Metaphor, apparently. Perhaps it doesn't matter. Is a Symbol the same as a Simile then? (Wetman)


I believe it is Gordia's son, Midas who was driving the ox-cart, and subsequently declared king. It was the father who made the sacrifice. (Anon)

You haven't been reading Arrian's Anabasis of Alexander, then. (Book ii.3)


The anon above is right. I have Arrian's Αλεξάνδρου Ανάβασις in front of me, and from what I read it seems that it was Gordia's ox-cart, but the declared king was his son Midas, who dedicated his father's cart to the god.
The exact passage is "καὶ τὴν ἅμαξαν τοῦ πατρὸς ἐν τῇ ἄκρᾳ ἀναθεῖναι χαριστήρια τῷ Διὶ τῷ βασιλεῖ ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀετοῦ τῇ πομπῇ." which means "...and he offered his father's cart as a gift to king Zeus as gratitude for sending the eagle". s:el:Αλεξάνδρου Ανάβασις - Βιβλίο ΒGeraki 2006-02-23 T 18:06 Z

Let me put this in the article, then, so people like me don't make over-confident errors such as mine. --Wetman 05:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
User:82.156.202.217 at 11:31, 23 October 2007 inserted the name Ahmidas. I've removed it now. --Wetman (talk) 01:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)


I heard that the prophecy was only that you had to undo the not, and that realizing this he didn't attempt to waste any more energy trying to untie it JedG

dvd thing[edit]

google it

Luo in Greek[edit]

I am not familiar with classical Greek, but I know that, in Koine Greek, the work for "to untie" is the same as "to destroy" (λυω), thus when Alexander goes to "untie the knot," he in fact "destroys the knot," those ideas being related semantically. Ierous 22:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Ierous

Why WikiProject Ancient Egypt?[edit]

Not to be a spoilsport, but what does this have to do with ancient Egypt? The myth is Greek, it involves Phrygians and Macedonians, even though those Macedonians did also conquer Egypt. (Perhaps an important source document was written in Hellenistic Egypt? Perhaps WikiProject Ancient Egypt is intended to be this broad? I'm just guessing here.) If there is a connection, it might be nice to go in the article too. --Toby Bartels 19:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I looked up (on this Wikipedia) my two guesses. The main soucre, Αλεξάνδρου Ανάβασις, was written by a Hellinistic Asian who retired to Europe but spent little time (if any) in Egypt; the scope of the WikiProject is rather narrow. In fact, since "This WikiProject aims primarily to standardize chronology and spellings of proper names in Ancient Egypt related articles." and there are no Egyptian names in the article (nor dates of events in Egypt), I'm going to be bold and remove the WikiProject heading. If somebody thinks that I'm wrong, then that's OK, and I won't argue; but the WikiProject page should probably be updated to indicate its true scope. --Toby Bartels 20:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

A simpler explanation: editors with content contribute content. --Wetman 04:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It was further prophesied by an oracle that the one to untie the knot would become the king of Australia.[edit]

Um...

...

I'm pretty sure that's someone vandalizing this page. Otherwise Greek history is a lot more confusing than I thought.


It is ok, somebody changed it back to Asia.

The same oracle?[edit]

"It was further prophesied by an oracle that the one to untie the knot would become the king of Asia." Was this the same oracle who made the original prediction? Was it part of the same prediction, or a separate one? Lessthanideal (talk) 01:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

external links[edit]

I've removed both per the links guideline. Happy to discuss. - brenneman 08:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Interpretations[edit]

Seems like the interpretations section has some problems. One paragraph was started but never finished in 01:27, 10 July 2008 edit. It's not clear how the reference to fable versus myth is relevant. Pradtke (talk) 05:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

A real Gordian knot[edit]

A real Gordian knot is a loop of uniform, slightly deformable material having a fixed diameter, tied upon itself tightly such that there isn't enough slack in any part to allow the knot to be untied (this reference shows an example, due to physicist Piotr Pieranski). It can be made physically by spicing rope into a loop, tying it properly while wet, then drying it. David Spector (user/talk) 22:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

True Significance of the Gordian Knot?[edit]

There's a lot to be said about the myth itself, which offers great study matter and insight on how people thought back then. To me, though, the Gordian Knot is just a fascinating story, not the reason why Alexander the Great was so successful in his conquests. He was merely doing what he was meant to do. The Bible prophesies the rise of Alexander to power and the division of his empire after his death(Daniel 8:3-7; 19-22). If one believes the Bible's historical accuracy (as well as its infallibility) it's clear that his abilities were God-given and not the result of a mere twist of fate. So let's not overemphasize the significance of the Gordian Knot in what Alexander accomplished.

History combined with legends is intriguing, however!

Thanks. 99.141.172.87 (talk) 23:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC) M.; September 24, 2012

Trefoil knot[edit]

Shouldn't the knot in question (Trefoil knot) be somewhere other than the see also section? Maybe in the lede? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

And maybe at Gordian Knot (disambiguation) too? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Lewis Henry Morgan??[edit]

Seems to me it's missing; you might find it HERE [[1]] and here [[2]]--187.233.233.166 (talk) 01:25, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Legend Section Problem[edit]

I like wikipedia and support it and all that but am nervous to edit anything because over the years I always seem to upset someone (and who needs that?). But there are two problems in the Legend Section... like maybe the page was hurriedly edited.

Two things: First: Paragraph One talks about an ox-cart and then there is a non sequitor reference to a chariot. Something happened here. Second: We are told about a knot being tied and then reminded that the knot was "untied" or otherwise destroyed and that is good. But where is it explained WHY the knot needed to be untied. Why did Alexander do it? Again, something has been deleted.

It is my hope that someone who has the authority or whatever to fix this will do so... and that I won't receive any nasty email on the subject. Good luck Hank01 (talk) 04:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

WWE mention[edit]

No relevant, not important, not cited in the slightest. I'm getting rid of this and requesting semi-protection; whoever keeps adding it back needs to realise it's not relevant to the subject at all.TheNeutroniumAlchemist (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Article locked please at RGM[edit]

Rube Goldberg machine

seems very similar as in a complicated thing that can be solved more simply. I do not add it as the article is locked dunno why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.190.193.52 (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

A Rube Goldberg machine has almost nothing in common with a Gordian Knot, in my opinion. If you want to edit the article to reflect your opinion as a fact, you will have to provide a Reliable Source. WP does not permit Original Research or opinions because it is an encyclopedia. David Spector (talk) 21:01, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Phineas & Ferb episode "Knot My Problem"[edit]

That episode was practically all about the Gordian Knot. That's where I learned what the Gordian Knot was, was that episode of Phineas & Ferb. Like, Buford told the story, and they all make a giant replication of the Gordian Knot, with themselves inside of it, and then they untie it, and it's made of licorice, and Candace gets hit with Doof's Eat-it-all-inator and so she's really hungry and she eats all the licorice ropes. Pretty sure that this episode needs a mention here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.26.114.98 (talk) 21:56, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gordian Knot. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Bad message[edit]

The quality standards message at the top is bad, it gives the whole article a bad tone, it should not be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.56.88.202 (talk) 03:18, 9 June 2019 (UTC)