It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
"Gog and Magog (/ˈɡɒɡ ... ˈmeɪɡɒɡ/; Hebrew: גּוֹג וּמָגוֹג Gog u-Magog) appear in the Hebrew Bible as individuals, peoples, or lands. In Ezekiel 38, Gog is an individual and Magog is his land; in Genesis 10 Magog is a man, but no Gog is mentioned; and centuries later Jewish tradition changed Ezekiel's Gog from Magog into Gog and Magog, which is the form in which they appear in the Book of Revelation, although there they are peoples rather than individuals.
A legend was attached to Gog and Magog by the time of the Roman period, that the Gates of Alexander were erected by Alexander the Great to repel the tribe. Romanized Jewish historian Josephus knew them as the nation descended from Magog the Japhetite, as in Genesis, and explained them to be the Scythians.
In the hands of Early Christian writers they became apocalyptic hordes,
and throughout the Medieval period variously identified as the Huns, Khazars, Mongols, Turanians or other nomads, or even the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.
The legend of Gog and Magog and the gates was also interpolated into the Alexander romances.
In one version, "Goth and Magoth" are kings of the Unclean Nations,
driven beyond a mountain pass by Alexander, and blocked from returning
by his new wall. Gog and Magog are said to engage in human cannibalism in the romances and derived literature. They have also been depicted on Medieval cosmological maps, or mappae mundi, sometimes alongside Alexander's wall.
"Yi, Man, Rong, and Di were further generalized into compounds (such as Róngdí, Mányí, and Mányíróngdí)
denoting "non-Chinese; foreigners; barbarians." Hieroglyphics refer to
these groups all have a section for indicating "animal/insect".
Nowadays, Chinese characters have omitted this symbolic section, so the
Chinese characters quoted above only have the "dog symbol" 犭 in the word Dí 狄.
The Yi ("Barbarian") had both specific denotations (e.g., Huaiyi 淮夷 "Huai River barbarians" and Xiyi 西夷 "western barbarians") and generalized references to "barbarian" (e.g., Sìyí "Four Barbarians"). The sinologist Edwin G. Pulleyblank (1983: 440) says the name Yi
"furnished the primary Chinese term for 'barbarian'," but
"Paradoxically the Yi were considered the most civilized of the
The Old Chinese pronunciation of Modern Chinese yí 夷 is reconstructed as *dyər (Bernhard Karlgren), *ɤier (Zhou Fagao), *ləj (William H. Baxter), and *l(ə)i (Axel Schuessler). Schuessler (2007: 563) defines Yi
as "The name of non-Chinese tribes, prob[ably] Austroasiatic, to the
east and southeast of the central plain (Shandong, Huái River basin),
since the Spring and Autumn period also a general word for 'barbarian'",
and proposes a "sea" etymology, "Since the ancient Yuè (=Viet) word for
'sea' is said to have been yí, the people's name might have originated as referring to people living by the sea"."
"Classical figures that blended into the Wild Man mythos are
discussed: the satyrs, fauns, and particularly Silvanus, as are other
pagan figures that tended to overlap with the Wild Man — the Dusios of
the Celts of Gaul, the schrat of German-speaking lands, and the ogre, a figure seemed particularly influential in French and Italian traditions.
While pagan versions of Wild Men were regarded by the Church as
demonic, the image of the Wild Man was in some occasions adopted into
saint iconography. We see a number of examples drawn from the era of
the Desert Fathers, when solitary hermitage in the wild was commonly
understood to be a path to God. Medieval artists, we learn, tended to
take the “wild” aspect of these figures, rather literally, and certain
church legends seem to support this."
Lucas Cranach the Elder
The thylacine was relatively shy and nocturnal, with the general
appearance of a medium-to-large-size dog, except for its stiff tail and abdominal pouch
similar to a kangaroo, and dark transverse stripes that radiated from
the top of its back, reminiscent of a tiger. The thylacine was a
formidable apex predator, though exactly how large its prey animals were is disputed. Because of convergent evolution it displayed a form and adaptations similar to the tiger and wolf of the Northern Hemisphere, even though not related. Its closest living relative is either the Tasmanian devil or the numbat. The thylacine was one of only two marsupials to have a pouch in both sexes: the other is the water opossum. The pouch of the male thylacine served as a protective sheath covering the external reproductive organs.
Asuras are sometimes considered nature spirits. They battle constantly with the devas. Asuras are described in Indian texts as powerful superhuman demigods with good or bad qualities. The good Asuras are called Adityas and are led by Varuna, while the malevolent ones are called Danavas and are led by Vritra. In the earliest layer of Vedic texts Agni, Indra
and other gods are also called Asuras, in the sense of them being
"lords" of their respective domains, knowledge and abilities. In later
Vedic and post-Vedic texts, the benevolent gods are called Devas, while malevolent Asuras compete against these Devas and are considered "enemy of the gods".
"Daeva (Avestan: daēuua) is an Avestan language term for a particular sort of supernatural entity with disagreeable characteristics. In the Gathas, the oldest texts of the Zoroastrian canon, the daevas are "gods that are (to be) rejected". This meaning is – subject to interpretation – perhaps also evident in the Old Persian "daiva inscription" of the 5th century BCE. In the Younger Avesta, the daevas are divinities that promote chaos and disorder. In later tradition and folklore, the dēws (Zoroastrian Middle Persian; New Persian divs) are personifications of every imaginable evil.
Daeva, the Iranian language term, should not be confused with the devas of Indian religions. While the word for the Vedic
spirits and the word for the Zoroastrian entities are etymologically
related, their function and thematic development is altogether
different. The once-widespread notion that the radically different
functions of Iranian daeva and Indic deva (and ahura versus asura) represented a prehistoric inversion of roles is no longer followed in 21st century academic discourse (see In comparison with Vedic usage for details).
Equivalents for Avestan daeva in Iranian languages include Pashto, Balochi, Kurdish dêw, Persian dīv/deev, all of which apply to demons, monsters, and other villainous creatures. The Iranian word was borrowed into Old Armenian as dew, Georgian as devi, and Urdu as deo, with the same negative associations in those languages. In English, the word appears as daeva, div, deev, and in the 18th century fantasy novels of William Thomas Beckford as dive.
Because all cognates of Iranian *daiva have a positive connotation, but "no known Iranian dialect attests clearly and certainly the survival of a positive sense for [Old Iranian] *daiva-", in the 19th- and 20th-century a great deal of academic discussion revolved around questions of how Iranian daeva
might have gained its derogatory meaning. This "fundamental fact of
Iranian linguistics" is "impossible" to reconcile with the testimony of
the Gathas, where the daevas, though rejected, were still evidently gods that continued to have a following. The same is true of the daiva inscription, where the daiva are the gods of (potential) rebels, but still evidently gods that continued to have a following."
In the Gathas, daevas are censured as being incapable of discerning truth (asha-) from falsehood (druj-). They are consequently in "error" (aēnah-), but are never identified as drəguuaṇt-
"people of the lie". The conclusion drawn from such ambiguity is that,
at the time the Gathas were composed, "the process of rejection,
negation, or daemonization of these gods was only just beginning, but,
as the evidence is full of gaps and ambiguities, this impression may be
In Yasna 32.4, the daevas are revered by the Usij, described as a class of "false priests", devoid of goodness of mind and heart, and hostile to cattle and husbandry (Yasna 32.10-11, 44.20). Like the daevas that they follow, "the Usij are known throughout the seventh region of the earth as the offspring of aka mainyu, druj, and arrogance. (Yasna 32.3)". Yasna 30.6 suggests the daeva-worshipping priests debated frequently with Zoroaster, but failed to persuade him."
The Div Sefid is believed by Joseph J. Reed to have been a northern prince. Warner believes that he is a personification of the Mazandaranians, who by their climate are an unhealthy pale colour; some scholars hold the opinion that these divs of Mazandaran are merely wild people of the forest.
Others are of the opinion that they are a group of enemy kings of
ancient Mazandaran (which might have been different from its modern
location) and Tabaristan. Alexander Krappe theorized that Ahriman himself was believed to have white skin. P. Molesworth Sykes believes that the name "White Div" represents a white nation.
himself was noted in Chinese descriptions of him, for his tall stature
and heavy beard. [Günther (1934) 185.] We should also note the following
depiction of Temujin's appearance, as given by Harold Lamb, in his
biography of the great Khan:
must have been tall, with high shoulders, his skin a whitish tan. His
eyes, set far apart under a sloping forehead, did not slant. And his
eyes were green, or blue-grey in the iris, with black pupils. Long
reddish-brown hair fell in braids to his back." [Lamb (1928) 23.]
ul Ghasi also observed that the family of Yesugai, the father of
Temujin, were known for the fact that their children often had fair
complexions, and blue or grey eyes. [Günther (1934) 185.] Temujin's
wife, Bourtai, bore a name which means "Grey-Eyed". [Lamb (1928) 23.] As
both Günther (1934) and Lamb (1928) note, Temujin's relatives and
descendants also possessed fair features: Temujin's son and successor
Ogadei (1229-41), had gray eyes and red hair; Temujin's grandson Mangu
(1251-9), had reddish eyebrows and a red-brown beard; Subatei, who
conquered China, had a long, reddish beard. Indeed, it was said that
people were surprised Kubilai Khan had dark hair and eyes, because most
of Genghis Khan's descendants had reddish hair and blue eyes. [Günther