I hope they print cards with indisputable Roman influence (not Greek, but Roman) simply so that I can see Flossed Beaver's head explode.
Maybe Theros was a plane found by, or created by two planewalker brothers. Theo and Ross. Or possibly Theros has a great military leader named Seazar, who is assassinated by another man of power named Broodtusk in the midst of a civil war.
Nothing against you Mr. Beaver, but you have to admit; if Maro comes out and says "Theros is will be a Greco-Roman set since they are essentially the same exact culture", you would jump off a bridge.
This is getting pretty off-topic. Remember, for MTG's purposes, it doesn't matter if they had distinctly different cultures. Most people view them as the same/hugely similar in culture, so they are as far as Magic is concerned.
Remember people, a movie and it's remake released literally in less than a single human lifespan, have inserted a creature into 'known' Greek culture that didn't exist (or play a large role if it did? Correct me history teachers.) before.
I hope they print cards with indisputable Roman influence (not Greek, but Roman) simply so that I can see Flossed Beaver's head explode.
Maybe Theros was a plane found by, or created by two planewalker brothers. Theo and Ross. Or possibly Theros has a great military leader named Seazar, who is assassinated by another man of power named Broodtusk in the midst of a civil war.
Nothing against you Mr. Beaver, but you have to admit; if Maro comes out and says "Theros is will be a Greco-Roman set since they are essentially the same exact culture", you would jump off a bridge.
Maybe it could be founded by Ross and Chandler instead. That, at least, would make more sense than what some people have been saying.
In the artwork that has been released so far of Theros, the architecture shows some evidence of arches (especially in ruins). Arches are characteristically Roman, and not Greek.
Right, and you keep saying that like it makes an ounce of difference. What does it matter who wrote the myths? Does that change the fact that Greek culture circa 1000 BCE and Roman culture circa 44 BCE were fundamentally different? By your logic, if someone were to right a history book about the Greeks right now then that would somehow magically reflect on our own culture.
I responded to the only part of your post that had an ounce of legitimacy to it. There's nothing "strawman" about that.
The difference is that a lot of what we know about ancient Greece, we only know from Roman sources. Also, there is a huge difference between poetry and a history book. Poetry is heavily influenced by the writer, a history book tries to be objective.
History in ancient times isn't what we now understand as history. Literally 'historia' (in Greek) just means 'story'. Most historians regarded there 'history' as such, like Herodotos. There are exceptions (like Thucydydes), but you really can't say history books in ancient times tried to be objective as a rule
This. Poetry was both extremely formal and academic at least up through the Renaissance.
The difference is that a lot of what we know about ancient Greece, we only know from Roman sources. Also, there is a huge difference between poetry and a history book. Poetry is heavily influenced by the writer, a history book tries to be objective.
Again, what does it matter who we know it from? I'm still not hearing a good argument (or any argument, really) as to why that's germane. "But Beave, what about the Virgil connection?!?" OK. The Aeneid was deliberately styled off of Homer. Are we conveniently ignoring his contributions to classical culture and mythology?
This. Poetry was both extremely formal and academic at least up through the Renaissance.
Again, what does it matter who we know it from? I'm still not hearing a good argument (or any argument, really) as to why that's germane. "But Beave, what about the Virgil connection?!?" OK. The Aeneid was deliberately styled off of Homer. Are we conveniently ignoring his contributions to classical culture and mythology?
Ok, apparently the poerty/history book comparison apparently wasn't really fitting. But even if it was formularic, it was still more personal than a simple recording of events (this, of course, only applies if the the recording of the events wasn't actually for another purpose, like Bellum Gallicum)
Also, if the only source we have on a topic is Roman, how can we assume that the author told those myths exactly as the Greeks knew them. Doesn't it make more sense to assume he "romanized" them a little, so his Roman audience can more easily relate to it.
But this is still magic the gathering. And of course those who want a pure greek set are going to be dissapointed by the fantasy of wotc. Its a stupid discussion, if anyone wishes to speak of greeco roman set i cant see why this wouldnt fit the load, or however you say it in english.
Id love too troll the greek sayers by saying this creature card is the 'cesar' of my deck. And how i will throw his critters in my colloseum lol. Speaking of this; wich greek roman cards did we have in the past? Will they maybe reprint any? labyrinth minotaur for example..
There's a difference between using Greco-Roman sounding names, and actually just taking a Greco-Roman name and changing it slightly, something I don't think WotC understood when they were naming things in this block. When the names are so close, it just becomes really obvious that there was a real lack of original thought in the characters and places. You can have themes of Greco-Roman mythology, but when you just start ripping things out wholesale, changing them slightly, and expecting people not to notice, it just becomes obnoxious.
Ok, apparently the poerty/history book comparison apparently wasn't really fitting. But even if it was formularic, it was still more personal than a simple recording of events (this, of course, only applies if the the recording of the events wasn't actually for another purpose, like Bellum Gallicum)
Also, if the only source we have on a topic is Roman, how can we assume that the author told those myths exactly as the Greeks knew them. Doesn't it make more sense to assume he "romanized" them a little, so his Roman audience can more easily relate to it.
Authorial bias is always the biggest hurdle when it comes to historiography, and we can't really make assumptions either way. It would certainly be anachronistic if that's the case, and it's something we definitely try to avoid with historical texts in this day and age. Did you read what I said about Gibbon? He literally wrote the book on Roman history, and while it's true that modern historians don't always see eye to eye with him, nobody would dare confuse 6th century Rome with 18th century England based on his writings.
During the panel, MaRo directly (multiple times) referenced Theros as a Greek set, not a Greco-Roman set. Expect more theatres than coliseums, more city-states than empires. That being said, because Greek and Roman cultures are so often confused, expect this to leak into the artwork if the creative team did not establish strict guidelines for artists.
There's a difference between using Greco-Roman sounding names, and actually just taking a Greco-Roman name and changing it slightly, something I don't think WotC understood when they were naming things in this block. When the names are so close, it just becomes really obvious that there was a real lack of original thought in the characters and places. You can have themes of Greco-Roman mythology, but when you just start ripping things out wholesale, changing them slightly, and expecting people not to notice, it just becomes obnoxious.
They didn't expect you not to notice. They expected you to notice and draw on myths you already know about the related Greek gods to help flavor the Theros gods. They are echos of the Greek pantheon, yes, and that's not a bad thing.
They didn't expect you not to notice. They expected you to notice and draw on myths you already know about the related Greek gods to help flavor the Theros gods. They are echos of the Greek pantheon, yes, and that's not a bad thing.
It's a bad or good thing, depends to who you ask.
For me it's ok for now but they really have to avoid a Hercules wanna-be guy or similar tropes. I just don't wanna see MtG loosing it's authenticity but i sure it's not the case.
They already added a lot of twists, such as using night sky to resemble the god race. Pretty cool.
There's a difference between using Greco-Roman sounding names, and actually just taking a Greco-Roman name and changing it slightly, something I don't think WotC understood when they were naming things in this block. When the names are so close, it just becomes really obvious that there was a real lack of original thought in the characters and places. You can have themes of Greco-Roman mythology, but when you just start ripping things out wholesale, changing them slightly, and expecting people not to notice, it just becomes obnoxious.
They didn't expect you not to notice. They expected you to notice and draw on myths you already know about the related Greek gods to help flavor the Theros gods. They are echos of the Greek pantheon, yes, and that's not a bad thing.
Echoes are perfectly acceptable. Heliod is an echo of Helios. Thassa is an echo of Thalassa. Nylea is an echo of...Nike? Hyperborea? The name works.
As Wizards has said when they changed Sariel's name to Tariel, though, actual names are not acceptable. (Wizards didn't use the name Sariel because it's an actual angel name.) Frankly, I think Wizards stepped over this line with Erebos. Erebos is an accepted spelling of the primordial Greek god of darkness named Erebus.
Echoes are perfectly acceptable. Heliod is an echo of Helios. Thassa is an echo of Thalassa. Nylea is an echo of...Nike? Hyperborea? The name works.
As Wizards has said when they changed Sariel's name to Tariel, though, actual names are not acceptable. (Wizards didn't use the name Sariel because it's an actual angel name.) Frankly, I think Wizards stepped over this line with Erebos. Erebos is an accepted spelling of the primordial Greek god of darkness named Erebus.
When changing single letters or sounds (which, as you note, they have a precedent of doing), you are bound to eventually repeat something that is taken as "an accepted spelling."
Note that even with the accepted spellings, the pronunciation is likely different: the original Greek /ˈɛrəbəs/ and the Magicked /ɛrəˈbɵs/ or /ɛrəˈboʊs/.
Regardless, it seems a silly thing to be upset about.
Echoes are perfectly acceptable. Heliod is an echo of Helios. Thassa is an echo of Thalassa. Nylea is an echo of...Nike? Hyperborea? The name works.
As Wizards has said when they changed Sariel's name to Tariel, though, actual names are not acceptable. (Wizards didn't use the name Sariel because it's an actual angel name.) Frankly, I think Wizards stepped over this line with Erebos. Erebos is an accepted spelling of the primordial Greek god of darkness named Erebus.
I quit Magic. I'm so done with Wizards. This is a total outrage.
They could make a card called "Jesus Christ" and I'd be fine with it. I mean, a regenerating human druid with Islandwalk? Not bad.
What the heck is Nylea derived from?! I've got no problem with these names at all; I'm so excited by the art and potential that I've put all EDH decks on hold until these cards spoiled. But it is really bothering me! WHERE IS IT FROM!?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Latest proof this forum is a trashfire:
Your authoritarianism will be the reason the company suffers another 60M in losses.
I quit Magic. I'm so done with Wizards. This is a total outrage.
They could make a card called "Jesus Christ" and I'd be fine with it. I mean, a regenerating human druid with Islandwalk? Not bad.
He doesn't regenerate himself, he regenerates the rest of your creatures when he dies. If you were to put him into your graveyard from play, instead exile him to your sideboard until someone casts Day of Judgment.
What the heck is Nylea derived from?! I've got no problem with these names at all; I'm so excited by the art and potential that I've put all EDH decks on hold until these cards spoiled. But it is really bothering me! WHERE IS IT FROM!?
While she is definitely related to Artemis, her name might derive from some combination of Nike and Thalia, or Eucleia (who was associated with Artemis), or perhaps a deified version of Penthesilea, Queen of the Amazons. Perhaps with some inspiration from Enyalius (though that character would likely be more red than green) or the Greek nymphs.
Her lack of a definite goddess likely means she isn't as closely related to her source material as, say, Heliod is to Helios.
OK, I'll admit I'm more aware of the differences between Roman and Greco culture than I am between Roman and Greco mythology (and everything I personally have seen of Theros so far makes it look like it's more based on the latter (mythology) than the former (culture) - although I guess in ancient times there was more of an overlap than there is these days). So can someone teach me how you would have god characters *based on/inspired by,* for example, Zeus, Hades and Athena, and have them in NO WAY recognisable as possibly also *based on/inspired by* Jupiter, Pluto and Minerva that is noticeable to the average person that doesn't have a degree in Classical Studies?
OK, I'll admit I'm more aware of the differences between Roman and Greco culture than I am between Roman and Greco mythology (and everything I personally have seen of Theros so far makes it look like it's more based on the latter (mythology) than the former (culture) - although I guess in ancient times there was more of an overlap than there is these days). So can someone teach me how you would have god characters *based on/inspired by,* for example, Zeus, Hades and Athena, and have them in NO WAY recognisable as possibly also *based on/inspired by* Jupiter, Pluto and Minerva that is noticeable to the average person that doesn't have a degree in Classical Studies?
While there are noticeable differences in the culture and styles of art (Greek columns compared to Roman arches, for example), the Pantheons are largely the same.
The discussion, in this case isn't where the *gods* are coming from but from where the buildings, costumes, and cultural tropes, etc. are from.
A Roman block as compared to a Greek block, for example, could be inspired much more by politics, scheming, and armies as compared to individual heroes, monsters, or feats of strength.
You can't. In modern culture, at least, they are virtually interchangeable for any average person. That said, based on the fact that the setting and culture of Theros is Greek-inspired, not Roman-inspired, it's fairly easy to say that the gods were inspired directly by the Greek pantheon, and therefore indirectly by the Roman gods.
To a certain extent, Theros is obviously still an interpretation, so I wouldn't be surprised if the creative team have borrowed small Roman elements for art and world-building alongside the heavy Greek influences, if just to add Classical visual cues. Of course, we've got Krakens in the set, which were never in Greek antiquity (outside of possibly influences from Ceto).
This. The word Jupiter is actually a bastardization of Zeus Pater - father Zeus. The Romans did worship many of the same exact gods, the problem here is that people take that to mean the cultures, history, and general atmosphere of these disparate times and areas are interchangeable. They are not. I've had to explain this time and again, but Roman religion goes far beyond the Greek pantheon.
Right now, I can't entirely trust that Wizards is going to stay entirely Greek (except for krakens) and not go into Roman territory. I'm still worried that they'll release something like the "Scythe of Saturnion" (heavily referring to the more agriculturally involved Roman Saturn and not the Greek Cronus) or the "Two-Way Mirror of Jannis" (Janus has no Greek equivalent).
Admittedly, releasing something that's quite ambiguous such as "Herkles's Quiver" (is that closer to the Greek Heracles or the Roman Hercules?) is more likely to happen.
Maybe Theros was a plane found by, or created by two planewalker brothers. Theo and Ross. Or possibly Theros has a great military leader named Seazar, who is assassinated by another man of power named Broodtusk in the midst of a civil war.
Nothing against you Mr. Beaver, but you have to admit; if Maro comes out and says "Theros is will be a Greco-Roman set since they are essentially the same exact culture", you would jump off a bridge.
PucaTrade Invite. Sign up and enjoy the first 500 points ($5) free!
Remember people, a movie and it's remake released literally in less than a single human lifespan, have inserted a creature into 'known' Greek culture that didn't exist (or play a large role if it did? Correct me history teachers.) before.
Maybe it could be founded by Ross and Chandler instead. That, at least, would make more sense than what some people have been saying.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
The difference is that a lot of what we know about ancient Greece, we only know from Roman sources. Also, there is a huge difference between poetry and a history book. Poetry is heavily influenced by the writer, a history book tries to be objective.
This. Poetry was both extremely formal and academic at least up through the Renaissance.
Again, what does it matter who we know it from? I'm still not hearing a good argument (or any argument, really) as to why that's germane. "But Beave, what about the Virgil connection?!?" OK. The Aeneid was deliberately styled off of Homer. Are we conveniently ignoring his contributions to classical culture and mythology?
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Ok, apparently the poerty/history book comparison apparently wasn't really fitting. But even if it was formularic, it was still more personal than a simple recording of events (this, of course, only applies if the the recording of the events wasn't actually for another purpose, like Bellum Gallicum)
Also, if the only source we have on a topic is Roman, how can we assume that the author told those myths exactly as the Greeks knew them. Doesn't it make more sense to assume he "romanized" them a little, so his Roman audience can more easily relate to it.
Psh. :rolls eyes: That card's Minoan.
Authorial bias is always the biggest hurdle when it comes to historiography, and we can't really make assumptions either way. It would certainly be anachronistic if that's the case, and it's something we definitely try to avoid with historical texts in this day and age. Did you read what I said about Gibbon? He literally wrote the book on Roman history, and while it's true that modern historians don't always see eye to eye with him, nobody would dare confuse 6th century Rome with 18th century England based on his writings.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
They didn't expect you not to notice. They expected you to notice and draw on myths you already know about the related Greek gods to help flavor the Theros gods. They are echos of the Greek pantheon, yes, and that's not a bad thing.
It's a bad or good thing, depends to who you ask.
For me it's ok for now but they really have to avoid a Hercules wanna-be guy or similar tropes. I just don't wanna see MtG loosing it's authenticity but i sure it's not the case.
They already added a lot of twists, such as using night sky to resemble the god race. Pretty cool.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Echoes are perfectly acceptable. Heliod is an echo of Helios. Thassa is an echo of Thalassa. Nylea is an echo of...Nike? Hyperborea? The name works.
As Wizards has said when they changed Sariel's name to Tariel, though, actual names are not acceptable. (Wizards didn't use the name Sariel because it's an actual angel name.) Frankly, I think Wizards stepped over this line with Erebos. Erebos is an accepted spelling of the primordial Greek god of darkness named Erebus.
When changing single letters or sounds (which, as you note, they have a precedent of doing), you are bound to eventually repeat something that is taken as "an accepted spelling."
Note that even with the accepted spellings, the pronunciation is likely different: the original Greek /ˈɛrəbəs/ and the Magicked /ɛrəˈbɵs/ or /ɛrəˈboʊs/.
Regardless, it seems a silly thing to be upset about.
I quit Magic. I'm so done with Wizards. This is a total outrage.
They could make a card called "Jesus Christ" and I'd be fine with it. I mean, a regenerating human druid with Islandwalk? Not bad.
He doesn't regenerate himself, he regenerates the rest of your creatures when he dies. If you were to put him into your graveyard from play, instead exile him to your sideboard until someone casts Day of Judgment.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
While she is definitely related to Artemis, her name might derive from some combination of Nike and Thalia, or Eucleia (who was associated with Artemis), or perhaps a deified version of Penthesilea, Queen of the Amazons. Perhaps with some inspiration from Enyalius (though that character would likely be more red than green) or the Greek nymphs.
Her lack of a definite goddess likely means she isn't as closely related to her source material as, say, Heliod is to Helios.
(So proud I only had to click on one to remember who it was.)
While there are noticeable differences in the culture and styles of art (Greek columns compared to Roman arches, for example), the Pantheons are largely the same.
The discussion, in this case isn't where the *gods* are coming from but from where the buildings, costumes, and cultural tropes, etc. are from.
A Roman block as compared to a Greek block, for example, could be inspired much more by politics, scheming, and armies as compared to individual heroes, monsters, or feats of strength.
This. The word Jupiter is actually a bastardization of Zeus Pater - father Zeus. The Romans did worship many of the same exact gods, the problem here is that people take that to mean the cultures, history, and general atmosphere of these disparate times and areas are interchangeable. They are not. I've had to explain this time and again, but Roman religion goes far beyond the Greek pantheon.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Admittedly, releasing something that's quite ambiguous such as "Herkles's Quiver" (is that closer to the Greek Heracles or the Roman Hercules?) is more likely to happen.