Talk:Nine Worthies

Judas Maccabeus actually appears in the Apocrypha, not the Old Testament, so his listing under the latter category is technically incorrect. Willy Logan 07:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

-The Apocrypha is considered by the Roman Catholic Church to be part of the Old Testament. Given that the author of the list was himself Roman Catholic, Maccabeus' listing is in fact correct. Rob 10:22 3 May 2006

The text of this wiki piece bears a strong resemblance ot the text on this page: http://moas.atlantia.sca.org/oak/08/worth.htm

Recent rewrites
It's now less clear that non-Christians who date from after the rise of Christianity were not eligible for consideration... AnonMoos (talk) 10:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Worthies named in Love's Labour's Lost
The article currently says: "(The three Worthies actually named in the play include two not on the original list, Hercules and Pompey the Great, as well as Alexander.)" But I think more are named in the play - Hector and Judas Maccabaeus at least - see http://web.uvic.ca/~mbest1/ISShakespeare/LLL/LLL5.2c.html - so, was something else meant by the statement? --David Edgar (talk) 16:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Earliest source?
The current article states that the Nine Worthies were first described by Jacques de Longuyon in 1312. But the Dutch version of this article, http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negen_Besten, states that they were described in a text by Jacob an Maerlant which was written "after 1291", but presumable also before ca. 1300 (since that is when Van Maerlant died). Anyone who knows more about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.163.98.151 (talk) 11:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Attributed coat of arms images
Late 15th-century images of the attributed arms of the worthies have been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons: -- AnonMoos (talk) 02:42, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Weird Phrase
What does this mean? "Together with their male counterparts, they precede Henry VI as he enters Paris in 1431..." They actually existed?? 24.215.163.97 (talk)JamestownArarat