Talk:Judensau

Untitled
Should the phrase 'repulsive and dehumanizing' be NPOV'd? Kent Wang 03:21, 31 May 2004 (UTC)


 * The JS goal was exactly to dehumanize and instill revulsion, and it worked. Human history is full of cruel and uncomfortable events and images, and a serious encyclopedia should reflect the facts and developments, to be used as a lesson for the future, instead of hiding them or changing the epithets to "bland and tasteless" (just as extreme example).  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 04:12, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

I've linked all the places in the list, however a few of them confused me: Cadolzburg, Colmar and Eberswalde, Erfurt: I thought they were town, region, but the second names are towns themselves; "Cadolzburg" doesn't appear anywhere, and Eberswalde is a town itself, but not in a region called Erfurt, it seems, suggesting it might not be that Eberswalde. Also with Vienna, Wimpfen, Vienna is obviously a city, but is this a smaller town of the same name somewhere else, in a region called "Wimpfen"? Someone who knows better can fix it up. TPK 01:46, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * They are all separate towns, not regions. - Who knows the source for the list? Please tell me on my page, we are about to fix the German article. Thanks! Jesusfreund 22:24, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The German article on this is now excellent. Some of that material needs to be brought over here, including more of the pictures, which are on Wikicommons. --Doric Loon 20:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Translation
I don't feel the new Translation "jews' sow" is really better than what we had befor ("jewish sow"). The german term is a compund word meaning literally "jew sow", so it justifies neither the genitive nor the plural (the n is an epenthesis and bears no meaning). 84.168.224.226 20:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually the linking -n- which is so common in German compound nouns does go back to an old genitive. But I am not sure that is what is happening in this word.  I suspect we have here a plural Juden as the first element, in which case the genitive is implied but you wouldn't expect it to be marked.  So Jews' sow (not Jew's sow!) is correct.  The depiction is, after all, of a group of jews with a sow.  But you are right, the form Judensau could theoretically be constructed differently, with juden being used almost adjectivally.  Then the sow herself would be Jewish.  But I don't think that is what is being depicted.  --Doric Loon 22:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * If I can just expand on my last comment (after clarifying my thoughts in conversation with a friend): the element Juden- can be used as the first part of a compound noun in at least two ways.   One is exemplified by the word Judenkindl, used in traditional Christmas plays to refer to the murdered infants of Bethlehem.  They are children who are Jews, therefore Juden- has a describing, adjectival force.  The second construction is exemplified by the place-name Judenberg, near my home in the Oberpfalz.  This is not a hill which is Jewish, it is a hill inhabited by Jews.  Juden- therefore has a genitive force.  Now the word Judensau in fact has two meanings.  It can be a very offensive, antisemitic insult, and I believe this was used in the NS period quite a lot; this is morphologically the first possibility: the person addressed is referred to as a sow (quite a common German insult) and more specifically as a Jewish one.  This is adjectival, as in Judenkindl.  The second meaning is that intended in the title of this article.  It refers to a real sow (or at least to an image of one), who belongs or pertains to a group of Jews.  This is genitive, as in Judenberg.  I hope that clarifies the grammar of the word.  Rather an unsavory topic to have to discuss in these terms, though.  --Doric Loon 21:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

What now?
Am I thick or is the obscene contact in question suckling at the teat of the unclean sow? That's what it looks like in the sculpture and that is what the name would imply. Can't we just say that? jengod 00:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes exactly. --Doric Loon 07:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have added "suckling and cuddling" which are the basic activities, though later depictions often go further (see the German version). Johnbod 13:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

date of shemhamephoras jpg
The image itself reads 1546. I'm confused as to the status of the object illustrated.

Best,

--Shlishke (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

In the United States?
Was this phenomenon unique to Europe, or did such depictions exist outside that continent (for example, at churches in the United States)? Stonemason89 (talk) 20:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, there has undoubtedly been medieval anti-Judaism in all countries were Jews lived, with pogroms even in England. The legends of Jews sacrifying children, for example, spread over entire Europe and even into the U.S. But the "Judensau" motive is in its core a German phenomenon, with a few cases in France and Belgium. Some sources say that it goes back to the medieval scholar and archbishop Rabanus Maurus, who was especially popular in Germany. To the best of my knowledge, there are no such depictions outside Europe. The main reason might be, that German colonialism was born in the 19th century, when open anti-Judaism and such depictions were deemed not longer acceptable for the clergy. --Robert Dabringhaus (talk) 09:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * When you write "pogroms EVEN in England" as though that were surprising, it is maybe worth spelling out what I'm sure you know: England was every bit as antisemitic as other parts of Europe. The reason there were relatively few pogroms there, and those that are recorded might therefore seem exceptional, is that for much of the Middle Ages, Jews were forbiden from residing in England at all. I suspect that is the only reason there are no examples of the Judensau in England from that period; certainly not because England was too enlightened. As for America, it hadn't been discovered in the 13th century. --Doric Loon (talk) 17:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Regensburg Judensau is now a Wolf
His love for Antisemitism, Dr. Rudolf Reiser (Regensburg) Historian and Dom Aficionado now found out that the "Jewish-Pig" is a female Wolf. He should be charged for that. Just my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Rosenberger (talk • contribs) 16:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

The article uses the word Shemhamphoras. Does Shemhamphoras refer to the any WP pages?
I have no idea what Shemhamphoras are, if anyone does they should create a WP page. It might refer to an existing WP page.

Should Shemhamphoras link to this Wikipedia page: Semiphoras and Schemhamphorash ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.35.92.140 (talk) 12:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Introduction: term "Saujude" has >>nothing<< to do with the medieval works of antisemitic art
The cited Encyclopedic Dictionary on Zionism and Israel clearly and correctly states that "Saujude" is a popular 20th-century Nazi derogation. The scope of this article is the "Judensau" motive in medieval Christian art. To make it clear: the word "Judensau" can either refer to the medieval carvings and sculptures etc., OR, as a derogation, be directed against a person or a group of persons (plural "Judensäue") of Jewish belief. The word "Saujude" can NEVER refer to the scope of this article, it is without exception a derogative expression used against a person, or a group of persons, or ("die Saujuden") against the Jewish people in general. As a consequence, I will remove this passage from the introduction. Btw: I'm working on articles about individual "Judensau" depictions, starting with the two (sic!) carvings and sculptures in the choir and at the outer wall of Cologne Cathedral. I just stumbled over the "partial list" in this article, which states (without citation) that in the Basilica of St. Severin, Cologne a second example for Cologne can be found. The linked article about St. Severin does not mention this. Can anybody, please, leave a source on my discussion page? Thanks, --Robert Dabringhaus (talk) 08:46, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

"neo-Nazi insult"
This needs to be removed from the article, no modern nazi uses this term. I have never even heard of this term and I am genocidally antisemitic; I came upon this article after searching on google for "jew pig" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.195.158 (talk) 03:58, 12 November 2017 (UTC)