A fact from Temple of Artemis, Corfu appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 October 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
That's a good question. The inline citations used in the article describe them as panthers/leopards. There are other citations however, not included in the article as far as I can remember, which call them lionesses. I guess the scholars are not completely in agreement. Thank you for the inquiry. Best regards. Dr.K.λogosπraxis13:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The errors here are caused by authors making presumptions and simply not looking at what is before their eyes in an analytical manner.
The animals have small manes, not present on either a panther or a lioness
The animal to the left has a penis, which has been copied on the reconstruction of the animal to the right. It is not in the correct position for a feline penis, but it is almost certainly intended to represent that part of the beast's anatomy. Consequently, one may assume that this is not a lioness.
The beast to the left has a tufted tail. This occurs on a lion, but neither a lioness nor a panther.
The beast to the left has a spotted coat. This coat would seem to indicate that the beast is a panther. However, the artist may know that young lions are also spotted, although the spots would usually have disappeared by the time the mane starts to grow.
On the evidence of the small mane and the tufted tail, I would assume that these creatures are intended to represent immature male lions, rather than either panthers or lionesses. Furthermore, immature male lions appear in other ancient sculpture and presumably had some iconographic meaning of which I am totally ignorant. A number of ancient examples exist in the British Museum. Several generations of children in our family have been yelled at by security staff for patting them and flopping on them, as I'm sure the children of ancient times must also have done.
The question is not about if those animals are lions or panthers : they are mythological figures. In his book Kerkyra : archaist Bauten und Bildwerke, G. Rodenwald argues if they are panthers or lions, and without finding a good reason to decide, call them Löwenpänther. In a more recent article about Corinthian art (Modèles stylistiques corinthiens dans le monde colonial de la deuxième moitié du VIIe siècle », in Revue Archéologique, 2003), F. Croissant gives the reasons why the question of a specific animal is useless : first, the artist has probably never seen neither a lion or a panther, except in a painting or a sculpture, second, Artemis is often imagined in mythology with wild animals such as lions or panthers, and that's why the temple bears this representation. I would add that on ceramic paints from Thasos, very close models to Kerkyra are found, so the carver isn't showing his own model but rather a stereotype, and lastly, in the beginning of the 1920's, when the ancient graveyard near the temple was excavated, apotropaic sculptures which look like our Löwenpänther were found. As the Gorgoneion, they are mythical animals which make sens inside Artemis cults. They are not a picture taken from a real animal.212.198.239.102 (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This has flared up again - people might or might not find the above helpful. Please note where a link to panther ends up! At the moment the article links Panthera, which is little use - it should be leopard if not lion. Johnbod (talk) 01:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the beast has circular spots. Lions don't have spots, ergo the panther description. I have added a picture where the circular spots are very clear. Dr.K.20:10, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The references provided to support 600 BC do not actually say so. One is actually in the article already and mentions "soon after 600 BC". The other reference mentions in the text only the 6th century BC which includes anything from 600 to 500 BC and mentions "c. 600-575" in the caption of the picture, not really a reliably sourced fact. Δρ.Κ.λόγοςπράξις21:21, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello :) i will not start a edit war, i most admit i were not aware of the three-revert rule on a single page within a 24-hour period, so thanks for helping me my friend :)
Hi. No problem, thank you for being so kind and understanding. As far as the years, how about c. 580 BC? A Google books search prefers that over the range 600-580. Other books yet mention 590-580 and even 575. I think "around 580" or "c. 580" is sufficient. I'm not sure why you want to mention 600. Δρ.Κ.λόγοςπράξις22:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So are we decided then? If the date that has been settled upon is 580 BC, then why have the dates 600-580 BC been used in the List? Amandajm (talk) 03:06, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
