Talk:List of oracular statements from Delphi

Cleanup Tag

Centrix proposed that this article required clean-up, and this was later dated to June 2006, by another author. Could they please state the reasons for the cleanup being required, so that the article could be improved. John D. Croft 03:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

For starters, the article doesn't cite its sources. It gives the impression that we have a surviving written record straight from the oracle itself, but I suspect what we actually have are at best mostly second hand accounts of what the Oracle supposedly said. (Specifically, "survived from various sources" as opposed to "reported by various sources" suggets that these prophecies were actually given by the oracle, rather than being distorted versions or perhaps even complete inventions. That's a pretty bold claim to simply attribute to "various sources". On the other hand, if the article just means to report famous statements attributed to the Oracle, which may or may not have been actual prophecies, then that needs to be made explicit.)

On a related note, the article doesn't distinguish between history and legend. Some of the supposed prophecies of the oracle may have not have actually occured, but rather may have been legends concocted later. For instance, the wikipedia article about Alexander's horse refers to the story told here as "mythic".

The article seems to be promoting the Oracle -- it ought to take a more neutral tone. Specifically, it pretty much exclusively reports prophecies that "came true" in some sense. Sure, these are probably more historically significant than incorrect prophecies, but if the article is going to suggest that the oracle was more accurate than one would expect from pure luck, then this assertion ought to be backed up with some solid evidence. Otherwise, it should acknowledge that the Oracle wasn't always right, and that some of its "hits" may have been invented after the fact, and that some prophecies were simply vague enough to be interpreted in such a way as to agree with whatever ended up happening.

The whole conclusion section doesn't seem to have the right tone for wikipedia. Statements like "it was truly an impressive record..." should be omitted, in favor of letting the record speak for itself. -- Tim314 19:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

In reading this page, the grammar seems awkward in many places. Fixing this would improve it for the reader.
--K. Haramundanis 20:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Most of the quotations from the oracle appear to be from Herodotus, but are not attributed. Why not? The story about Alexander and his horse has nothing to do with the oracle and could usefully be deleted. Should it be? In the mention of the Therans and a colony in Libya, what has Platea to do with either? --K. Haramundanis 22:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Battle Of Salamis

The Link Takes You To The Battle of Salamis That Happened Over 100 Years After Solon

Later Oracles of the Roman Period, 361 CE

There's an incomplete sentence here that seems to have been so for some time:

In 361 CE, despite the attempt by the Emperor Julian revive the Oracle by removing Hadrian's plug and to exempt the temple from taxation and protect its priesthood,

The article's first quote from the Delphic Oracle does not have a reference. And I have nit been able to find it, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.29.188.185 (talk) 15:11, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

The utterances are somewhat flawed

Mainly due to poetic licence. Here is some more litteral translations.

560 BC

οἶδα δ᾽ ἐγὼ ψάμμου τ᾽ ἀριθμὸν καὶ μέτρα θαλάσσης, καὶ κωφοῦ συνίημι, καὶ οὐ φωνεῦντος ἀκούω. ὀδμή μ᾽ ἐς φρένας ἦλθε κραταιρίνοιο χελώνης ἑψομένης ἐν χαλκῷ ἅμ᾽ ἀρνείοισι κρέεσσιν, ᾗ χαλκὸς μὲν ὑπέστρωται, χαλκὸν δ᾽ ἐπιέσται.

I know both the number of (the grains of) sand and the measure of the sea, and I am conscious of (i.e. I understand) the mute, and hear the ones who do not speak. To my sense came the smell of a hard-shelled tortoise, boiling in a bronze (pot, cauldron..) with the flesh of a lamb, which both under is bronze and over is bronze.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν ἡμίονος βασιλεὺς Μήδοισι γένηται, καὶ τότε, Λυδὲ ποδαβρέ, πολυψήφιδα παρ᾽ Ἕρμον φεύγειν μηδὲ μένειν μηδ᾽ αἰδεῖσθαι κακός εἶναι.

But when the Medes have a mule as king, then, tender-footed Lydian, by the stone-strewn Hermus flee and do not stay, and be not ashamed to be craven. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Servus Triviae (talk • contribs) 04:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

67 AD

Galba would have been 73 when Nero died, if he hadn't died two years earlier, in 69 BC, a few months before his 72nd birthday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.142.48.96 (talk) 04:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

So much unsourced, contradictory statements

For example, the last prophecy. Sources say it was actually to emperor Julian, and the wording was

"Tell to the king that the carven hall is fallen in decay; Apollo has no chapel left, no prophesying bay, No talking spring. The stream is dry that had so much to say."

I am tempted to just take out that whole prophecy because it makes so little sense. Why would a christian emperor ask for advice from the long defeated oracle? but putting in a "dubious" tag will be good enough.75.73.114.111 (talk) 23:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)