6 ms·

>Why did they build a maze for the Minotaur with a possible escape route rather than just an ordinary prison? Why leave the possibility of escape open? Because

>Why did they build a maze for the Minotaur with a possible escape route rather than just an ordinary prison? Why leave the possibility of escape open? Because it was not a maze, the Minotaur lived in the center of a labyrinth. A labyrinth is a continuous path that leads to the center. The objective was to send people into it so they would end up in the Minotaur's lair and be devoured. The reason the monster stayed was that he had everything he needed there, especially food.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
asdiovjdfi 2y ago
Interesting how the choice of design of ancient coins will, many years later, lead to comments like this.
x3n0ph3n3 2y ago
That's a really interesting distinction between the words, but sources from Wikipedia indicate that the minotaur was trapped in a maze: > Although early Cretan coins occasionally exhibit branching (multicursal) patterns, the single-path (unicursal) seven-course "Classical" design without branching or dead ends became associated with the Labyrinth on coins as early as 430 BC, and similar non-branching patterns became widely used as visual representations of the Labyrinth – even though both logic and literary descriptions make it clear that the Minotaur was trapped in a complex branching maze.
aidenn0 2y ago
Surely, if it wasn't a maze, then there would have been no need for Ariadne to have given Theseus a ball of thread to find the way back out.
- antisthenes 2y ago
  A forest isn't a maze, but if it's my first time going into an unknown forest, you bet your ass I would take a compass with me. If I lived in it for 20+ years, I probably wouldn't.
  - drdeca 2y ago
    Ok, but surely if there are no branches, but only a single path, there would be no way to get lost? The only way would be if you forgot which direction you were facing?
    - chaps 2y ago
      You could have side-paths that quickly go nowhere, but without any hints as to which ones do or don't. That way, backtracking towards the main path is pretty trivial and leads to a constant forward progression.
      - Doxin 2y ago
        A labyrinth by definition has no side-paths, not even ones that quickly go nowhere.
        livrem 2y ago
        I like mazes and I saw that distinction be made before, but I am not sure how universally accepted it is? Other than English how many languages even have two different words? I spent some time now on Google Translate and the only language I find (not that I tried ALL) is Finnish. Modern Greek for instance uses the same word (assuming Google is correct), so did people on Crete, whatever their language was, even have two different words?
        Doxin 2y ago
        This is an edge case which google translate is going to be bad at. You can at a minimum add dutch to your dataset: doolhof vs labyrint.
        livrem 2y ago
        But Google Translate is correct about Dutch. It was just not one of the languages I tried before. I do not think it is a particularly difficult case for translation. The reason I checked was in my native Swedish there is only one word (labyrint). Was it really always two different things even in English? I looked the words up in Gutenberg's public domain Webster's Unabridged Dictionary (1890?) a labyrinth there was "an ornamental maze" ... "Labyrinth, originally; the name of an edifice or excavation, carries the idea of design, and construction in a permanent form, while maze is used of anything confused or confusing, whether fixed or shifting. We speak of the labyrinth of the ear, or of the mind, and of a labyrinth of difficulties; but of the mazes of the dance, the mazes of political intrigue, or of the mind being in a maze." And from the definition of maze: "A confusing and baffling network, as of paths or passages; an intricacy; a labyrinth". Did the meaning drift a bit since then or was it only in mathematics that the words began to be used in the way that they are often used now for branching vs non-branching mazes? https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29765 https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29765
- Archelaos 2y ago
  The ancient textual and pictorial tradition are in contradiction to each other here, which probably cannot be resolved. Ariadne's thread suggests a branching labyrinth, but in ancient pictures we actually only find unicursal labyrinths. For the textual tradition: https://www.theoi.com/Ther/Minotauros.html https://www.theoi.com/Ther/Minotauros.html Some images of Roman labyrinths: https://www.labyrinthos.net/photopage02.html https://www.labyrinthos.net/photopage02.html
  - zarzavat 2y ago
    Maybe they just found it hard to draw a branching labyrinth? It’s easy for us with Wikipedia and all, but if you’d potentially never seen a branching labyrinth then a non-branching labyrinth is a lot easier to draw. It’s especially hard for modern people to conceive of a world before the printing press where information wasn’t easy accessible.
    - whythre 2y ago
      The challenge may have also been artistic. I don’t know if those artists would have been up for a branching labyrinth. I have seen how medievals drew cats and they do not look right.
  - spoiler 2y ago
    TIL labyrinth and maze aren't the same thing! I always thought they were synonyms. I grew up in Croatia, and there the word for both maze and labyrinth is "labirint"
    - tengwar2 2y ago
      They overlap in meaning to the extent that I would use either interpretation for either word. For instance in England there are chalk figures called miz-mazes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizmaze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizmaze) which are non-branching.
aiilns 2y ago
I don't think you're right. I won't pretend to be an expert on any of this, but as a speaker of modern Greek I can confidently say that λαβύρινθος (labyrinth) is the only word in Greek to describe both your definition of a labyrinth and a maze. For example, this Wikipedia article[1] on labyrinth in Greek, which has the picture [2] of a maze and calls it a labyrinth. [1] https://el.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9B%CE%B1%CE%B2%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BD%CE%B8%CE%BF%CF%82 https://el.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9B%CE%B1%CE%B2%CF%8D%CF%... [2] https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NAMA_Tablette_1287.jpg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NAMA_Tablette_1287...

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

asdiovjdfi 2y ago

Interesting how the choice of design of ancient coins will, many years later, lead to comments like this.

x3n0ph3n3 2y ago

That's a really interesting distinction between the words, but sources from Wikipedia indicate that the minotaur was trapped in a maze: > Although early Cretan coins occasionally exhibit branching (multicursal) patterns, the single-path (unicursal) seven-course "Classical" design without branching or dead ends became associated with the Labyrinth on coins as early as 430 BC, and similar non-branching patterns became widely used as visual representations of the Labyrinth – even though both logic and literary descriptions make it clear that the Minotaur was trapped in a complex branching maze.

aidenn0 2y ago

Surely, if it wasn't a maze, then there would have been no need for Ariadne to have given Theseus a ball of thread to find the way back out.

antisthenes 2y ago
A forest isn't a maze, but if it's my first time going into an unknown forest, you bet your ass I would take a compass with me. If I lived in it for 20+ years, I probably wouldn't.
- drdeca 2y ago
  Ok, but surely if there are no branches, but only a single path, there would be no way to get lost? The only way would be if you forgot which direction you were facing?
  - chaps 2y ago
    You could have side-paths that quickly go nowhere, but without any hints as to which ones do or don't. That way, backtracking towards the main path is pretty trivial and leads to a constant forward progression.
    - Doxin 2y ago
      A labyrinth by definition has no side-paths, not even ones that quickly go nowhere.
      - livrem 2y ago
        I like mazes and I saw that distinction be made before, but I am not sure how universally accepted it is? Other than English how many languages even have two different words? I spent some time now on Google Translate and the only language I find (not that I tried ALL) is Finnish. Modern Greek for instance uses the same word (assuming Google is correct), so did people on Crete, whatever their language was, even have two different words?
        Doxin 2y ago
        This is an edge case which google translate is going to be bad at. You can at a minimum add dutch to your dataset: doolhof vs labyrint.
        livrem 2y ago
        But Google Translate is correct about Dutch. It was just not one of the languages I tried before. I do not think it is a particularly difficult case for translation. The reason I checked was in my native Swedish there is only one word (labyrint). Was it really always two different things even in English? I looked the words up in Gutenberg's public domain Webster's Unabridged Dictionary (1890?) a labyrinth there was "an ornamental maze" ... "Labyrinth, originally; the name of an edifice or excavation, carries the idea of design, and construction in a permanent form, while maze is used of anything confused or confusing, whether fixed or shifting. We speak of the labyrinth of the ear, or of the mind, and of a labyrinth of difficulties; but of the mazes of the dance, the mazes of political intrigue, or of the mind being in a maze." And from the definition of maze: "A confusing and baffling network, as of paths or passages; an intricacy; a labyrinth". Did the meaning drift a bit since then or was it only in mathematics that the words began to be used in the way that they are often used now for branching vs non-branching mazes? https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29765 https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29765
Archelaos 2y ago
The ancient textual and pictorial tradition are in contradiction to each other here, which probably cannot be resolved. Ariadne's thread suggests a branching labyrinth, but in ancient pictures we actually only find unicursal labyrinths. For the textual tradition: https://www.theoi.com/Ther/Minotauros.html https://www.theoi.com/Ther/Minotauros.html Some images of Roman labyrinths: https://www.labyrinthos.net/photopage02.html https://www.labyrinthos.net/photopage02.html
- zarzavat 2y ago
  Maybe they just found it hard to draw a branching labyrinth? It’s easy for us with Wikipedia and all, but if you’d potentially never seen a branching labyrinth then a non-branching labyrinth is a lot easier to draw. It’s especially hard for modern people to conceive of a world before the printing press where information wasn’t easy accessible.
  - whythre 2y ago
    The challenge may have also been artistic. I don’t know if those artists would have been up for a branching labyrinth. I have seen how medievals drew cats and they do not look right.
- spoiler 2y ago
  TIL labyrinth and maze aren't the same thing! I always thought they were synonyms. I grew up in Croatia, and there the word for both maze and labyrinth is "labirint"
  - tengwar2 2y ago
    They overlap in meaning to the extent that I would use either interpretation for either word. For instance in England there are chalk figures called miz-mazes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizmaze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizmaze) which are non-branching.

aiilns 2y ago

I don't think you're right. I won't pretend to be an expert on any of this, but as a speaker of modern Greek I can confidently say that λαβύρινθος (labyrinth) is the only word in Greek to describe both your definition of a labyrinth and a maze. For example, this Wikipedia article[1] on labyrinth in Greek, which has the picture [2] of a maze and calls it a labyrinth. [1] https://el.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9B%CE%B1%CE%B2%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BD%CE%B8%CE%BF%CF%82 https://el.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9B%CE%B1%CE%B2%CF%8D%CF%... [2] https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NAMA_Tablette_1287.jpg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NAMA_Tablette_1287...