Jump to content

Talk:Raskovnik

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleRaskovnik has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 3, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 2, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in Bulgarian mythology, the razkovniche is a magical herb that can open all locks and transmute iron into gold, but it can only be identified by a tortoise?

Untitled

[edit]

In the paper I linked I noticed that the plant is in fact common in all Slavic mythology, but have no will to update the article now, nor I have the idea on how should it be called. Nikola 20:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to stick to South Slavic mythology. Apparently, magic weed is a common motif in European mythology is a whole. But we have to stop somewhere, and common etymology and deeply linked myths is a good place to do that. TodorBozhinov 19:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tortoise and magic plants

[edit]

Interestingly, a "divine tortoise" is also described as the guardian of a magic plant (in this case, yarrow used for divination) in ancient Chinese mythology: Loewe, Michael (1994), Divination, mythology and monarchy in Han China, Volume 48 of University of Cambridge oriental publications, Cambridge University Press, p. 94, ISBN 0521454662. Make what you want out of it... -- Vmenkov (talk) 05:43, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Curious, thanks for that. Mythology tends to have many recurring themes around the world :) Best, TodorBozhinov 08:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Serious problems

[edit]

This article has serious problems. For one, rather than spell out how specific traditions relate to one another and discussing sources, it presents a synthesized account of this material. Prior to my recently clean up, it also contained fringe elements (like references to cryptozoology) and confused myth with folklore. If what I'm seeing is any indication, the sources used for this article could use a close look. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]