3 ms·

When the author said that Demeter was the goddess of corn, I nearly stopped reading. Facts: Demeter was a goddess of grain and harvest. Ergot (Claviceps spec

When the author said that Demeter was the goddess of corn, I nearly stopped reading. Facts: Demeter was a goddess of grain and harvest. Ergot (Claviceps species), and specifically ergot growing on rye (Secale cereale) has psychoactive properties; this ergot is liekly the source of psychedelic experience in the Elusinean Mysteries. Corn (Zea mays) was not introduced to Europe until the Columbian exchange; the fungus that grown on corn (smut, huitalacoche) is edible and not obviously psychoactive. Whether psychedelic/unity experience makes one a better person, is an interesting question. As, too, is the question the author asked in the second half of essay, exploring the meaning of "better person" in relation to contemporary Western and Shipibo Indian cultures.

TheCoelacanth 9y ago
The author is from the UK, so they are probably using the British definition of corn[1] which can refer to many different kinds of grain. Using that definition of corn, the article doesn't seem to be inaccurate. [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/corn#Etymology_1 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/corn#Etymology_1
- Nomentatus 9y ago
  Right, remember that when Middle English was around, the New World hadn't been discovered, so the word definitely was not applied to maize originally. This British usage still remains in place as far as I know. Those darned Brits - you'd think they invented the language, the way they sling it around any way they want!
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Right, remember that when Middle English was around, the New World hadn't been discovered Well, Middle English starts a couple centuries after the Norse settlement in North America, so that's not strictly true, even with the implict “by Europeans” restriction.
    - Nomentatus 9y ago
      Point taken, and worth noting, the English hadn't discovered the New World, but other Europeans, including Portugal, had. But maize wasn't grown anything like that far north!!! Maybe as far north as Missouri, where there were dense populations, but not further. So, yes, it is strictly true that maize would be unknown in England then. But c'mon man, "the Oxford English Dictionary specifies the period of 1150 to 1500" so when the usage was established in England only Vikings had reached the New World, in Newfoundland, etc.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > So, yes, it is strictly true that maize would be unknown in England then. Yes, it's strictly true that maize would (almost certainly) be unknown, just not because North America hadn't been discovered by cultures in contact with England prior to the point of time in question.
        Nomentatus 9y ago
        You could simply have said "we now agree," I believe.

TheCoelacanth 9y ago

The author is from the UK, so they are probably using the British definition of corn[1] which can refer to many different kinds of grain. Using that definition of corn, the article doesn't seem to be inaccurate. [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/corn#Etymology_1 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/corn#Etymology_1

Nomentatus 9y ago
Right, remember that when Middle English was around, the New World hadn't been discovered, so the word definitely was not applied to maize originally. This British usage still remains in place as far as I know. Those darned Brits - you'd think they invented the language, the way they sling it around any way they want!
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Right, remember that when Middle English was around, the New World hadn't been discovered Well, Middle English starts a couple centuries after the Norse settlement in North America, so that's not strictly true, even with the implict “by Europeans” restriction.
  - Nomentatus 9y ago
    Point taken, and worth noting, the English hadn't discovered the New World, but other Europeans, including Portugal, had. But maize wasn't grown anything like that far north!!! Maybe as far north as Missouri, where there were dense populations, but not further. So, yes, it is strictly true that maize would be unknown in England then. But c'mon man, "the Oxford English Dictionary specifies the period of 1150 to 1500" so when the usage was established in England only Vikings had reached the New World, in Newfoundland, etc.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > So, yes, it is strictly true that maize would be unknown in England then. Yes, it's strictly true that maize would (almost certainly) be unknown, just not because North America hadn't been discovered by cultures in contact with England prior to the point of time in question.
      - Nomentatus 9y ago
        You could simply have said "we now agree," I believe.