"panthea" meaning in English

{
  "head_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "en",
        "2": "noun form"
      },
      "expansion": "panthea",
      "name": "head"
    }
  ],
  "lang": "English",
  "lang_code": "en",
  "pos": "noun",
  "senses": [
    {
      "categories": [
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "English entries with incorrect language header",
          "parents": [
            "Entries with incorrect language header",
            "Entry maintenance"
          ],
          "source": "w"
        },
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "English plurals in -a with singular in -um or -on",
          "parents": [],
          "source": "w"
        }
      ],
      "examples": [
        {
          "ref": "1998, Ton Derks, Gods, Temples and Ritual Practices: The Transformation of Religious Ideas and Values in Roman Gaul, Amsterdam University Press, page 78",
          "text": "As an alternative for Dumézil’s functional classification, Oosten suggests a classification in terms of kinship relations. Such an approach corresponds to the perspective of the participants and enables the researcher to define not only the place of a god in the pantheon, but also his relation to other members of the pantheon. Our information, however, is so insufficient that there can be no question of any reconstruction of the complete panthea, let alone of the various kinship ties between their members. Yet we can take advantage of Oosten’s observations. First, the conclusion that kinship is the primary organizing principle in all Indo-European panthea may draw our attention to the importance of relationships between male and female deities. If, as we shall see, the epigraphical sources give the impression that male and female cults were strictly separated, all to radical inferences are better avoided. Second, from Oosten’s proposition the important conclusion may be drawn that the introduction of new gods was also conceptualized in terms of kinship.",
          "type": "quotation"
        }
      ],
      "form_of": [
        {
          "word": "pantheon"
        }
      ],
      "glosses": [
        "plural of pantheon"
      ],
      "id": "en-panthea-en-noun-E3F7jm9W",
      "links": [
        [
          "pantheon",
          "pantheon#English"
        ]
      ],
      "tags": [
        "form-of",
        "plural"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "sounds": [
    {
      "ipa": "/ˈpanθɪa/",
      "tags": [
        "Received-Pronunciation"
      ]
    },
    {
      "ipa": "/ˈpænθiˌa/",
      "tags": [
        "US"
      ]
    },
    {
      "enpr": "pănʹthĭă",
      "tags": [
        "US"
      ]
    },
    {
      "enpr": "pănʹthiă'",
      "tags": [
        "US"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "word": "panthea"
}

{
  "head_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "en",
        "2": "noun form"
      },
      "expansion": "panthea",
      "name": "head"
    }
  ],
  "lang": "English",
  "lang_code": "en",
  "pos": "noun",
  "senses": [
    {
      "categories": [
        "English 3-syllable words",
        "English entries with incorrect language header",
        "English non-lemma forms",
        "English noun forms",
        "English plurals in -a with singular in -um or -on",
        "English terms with IPA pronunciation",
        "English terms with quotations"
      ],
      "examples": [
        {
          "ref": "1998, Ton Derks, Gods, Temples and Ritual Practices: The Transformation of Religious Ideas and Values in Roman Gaul, Amsterdam University Press, page 78",
          "text": "As an alternative for Dumézil’s functional classification, Oosten suggests a classification in terms of kinship relations. Such an approach corresponds to the perspective of the participants and enables the researcher to define not only the place of a god in the pantheon, but also his relation to other members of the pantheon. Our information, however, is so insufficient that there can be no question of any reconstruction of the complete panthea, let alone of the various kinship ties between their members. Yet we can take advantage of Oosten’s observations. First, the conclusion that kinship is the primary organizing principle in all Indo-European panthea may draw our attention to the importance of relationships between male and female deities. If, as we shall see, the epigraphical sources give the impression that male and female cults were strictly separated, all to radical inferences are better avoided. Second, from Oosten’s proposition the important conclusion may be drawn that the introduction of new gods was also conceptualized in terms of kinship.",
          "type": "quotation"
        }
      ],
      "form_of": [
        {
          "word": "pantheon"
        }
      ],
      "glosses": [
        "plural of pantheon"
      ],
      "links": [
        [
          "pantheon",
          "pantheon#English"
        ]
      ],
      "tags": [
        "form-of",
        "plural"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "sounds": [
    {
      "ipa": "/ˈpanθɪa/",
      "tags": [
        "Received-Pronunciation"
      ]
    },
    {
      "ipa": "/ˈpænθiˌa/",
      "tags": [
        "US"
      ]
    },
    {
      "enpr": "pănʹthĭă",
      "tags": [
        "US"
      ]
    },
    {
      "enpr": "pănʹthiă'",
      "tags": [
        "US"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "word": "panthea"
}