User talk:Haploidavey/User's Archive 2

Flowers for Uncle Jules

The identity of the victims is unknown, but here's your whine and cheese.

Well, I'll have to add that to my list of things to do in Rome come November. Better, pour a libation. Cynwolfe (talk) 23:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, multas per gentes (the poker-faced literalism of the second sentence there always make me chuckle, strictly speaking) … Cynwolfe (talk) 00:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

You have an email from me. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, fetters, and as I passed, I saw their skeletal remains, the boney wrists still locked within, nails dug into the breached clay where, through the slender hopeful gaps, their dying eyes had glimpsed the twinkling stars of Constellatio Rationis … ah, Reason, who once rotated the poles. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Yours was the poem; mine was Poe. I actually thought yours was a quote, but hadn't had a chance to look it up yet, fingers clutching as they are through the clay. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:46, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

You should probably remove this disturbing image, which grows creepier the longer I look at it, but had to share it. Who sez the still life is boring, with little to say? Cynwolfe (talk) 14:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I, like, totally dig being called Imperatrix. I was just hoisting a glass of Malbec and changing mine and Nappy's greeting when I received your hail. To life! Cynwolfe (talk) 01:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

diffs

Checking in while waiting to eat a marvelous dinner I smell cooking, and saw your note on diffs. Go to the edit history of the relevant page; find the entry you're looking for; hit the compare button. The context may sometimes be improved by moving forward to look at the response, or moving back to see the original remark, particularly if there are intervening edits. When you have the view you want, copy the URL address and use as you would an external link. I am depressed by the circumstances that led to the necessity of my learning this. Hope this makes sense. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:25, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

RfC Teeninvestor

Please comment on what I have posted here. --Tenmei (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

tiny dancer

I was watching this and thought I'd share it with you and Mum — it's wonderful. Make sure you have the sound turned on. Then I had the strangest feeling of déjà vu … have I given you this before? Cynwolfe (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

favor

I've sent you an email asking for a favor of a sort of copyediting nature. Cynwolfe (talk) 12:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Novensiles

I'm trying to return to work on the several articles I've left hanging that pertain to Roman religion. Just wanted to alert you that one of these is Novensiles. What I've done there is by no means adequate, and I have at least a dozen notes I need to pursue further that I haven't dumped into the page. By adding the beginnings of two sections, however, I think the frame is now in place within which further development can take place. I moved some bibliographic notes to the talk page, pending integration into the framework of the article as a whole and wikification. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I was struck by the 'military Lar' too. Robert E.A. Palmer has something, but the book's only snippets online. Come to think of it, though, I might've checked this one out and have it here somewhere. I'll check. And here is an interesting-looking article from a 1920 AJA; I don't know the author, so I don't know whether this is a last gasp of Cambridge Ritualist enthusiasm or some such, or whether it's a woman who made a valiant effort but didn't make it through the patriarchal wall — not everyone had Lily Ross Taylor's persistence, and once in a while I turn up these insightful-if-flawed one-off pieces by women pre-WW2. I was struck recently by a comment in regard to the exceedingly minor Louise Bovie: because they haven't been in a position to get themselves "out there" and mature, "authors often go on to the end of their lives without curing themselves of certain faults which no one has been at the pains to draw their attention to." Cynwolfe (talk) 22:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I know you said you had removed some pages from your watchlist for peace of mind; but you're still watching the Glossary, aren't you? Cynwolfe (talk) 16:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Lex

Did you rewrite the Glossary entry on lex from preexisting material? I'm not understanding these sentences: A Roman law was framed and validated only with divine approval. Parties were bound to observance by sacrifice in the name of witnessing deities. I feel as if I've nothing to hold on to there; both verbs are passive, so it's as if this is happening in some void without human agency. Which may be an accurate reflection of how the Romans thought of it. Why do I put this here instead of the talk page? You may make assumptions. It seems to me that the first distinction, which turns out not to be a distinction, is that the Glossary should concern itself with religious law. (Not a real distinction, since civil and religious are intertwined, but you know what I mean: as in "augural law" and such.) Curiously, a major omission in the Roman law article seems to be an explanation of the word lex; it gives examples of Lex Hortensia etc. without explaining what that the word lex is the Latin word for "law" and that the plural is leges. Sigh. Also lex vs. ius.

Anyway, "A Roman law was framed and validated only with divine approval" sounds a little in-universe: we're asserting that a Roman law actually had divine approval? And what does "framed and validated" mean? (I think you know I understand the obstacles trying to make sense of what was there originally.) Does the second sentence mean that sacrifices accompanied the actual passing of leges as a legislative procedure? At what point in the proceedings were the gods called to witness? Did they have to approve near the beginning of the process, or only after all the humans had done their work? Mostly I'm thinking aloud here, and don't 'spect you to have all the answers. But it's why I object to the Glossary being written as if we're peering into the lost mists of time as Egeria beamed over Numa's shoulder, instead of Cicero grumbling about having to study some bird's ass.

I shall try to come up with more helpful offerings than this rant. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I know, I know … I'm trying to be discreet about this, y'know. Terrible things have also happened to mos maiorum, a formerly useful little article. I know it isn't your doing. Cynwolfe (talk) 23:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

ritus graecia (sic)

See note at Talk:Glossary of ancient Roman religion#'ritus graecia'?. I think this is popping up in other WP articles such as Ceres; the phrase isn't making syntactical sense to me, as I've seen it only as ritus graecus, and wonder which of your sources used this. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Foreign Cults in Rome: Creating a Roman Empire, hot off Oxford UP, it seems (2010); or I just now saw it. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Servius T.

Maybe it's just that my religious upbringing occurred in a small country church in Appalachia, but the Gospels of the United Methodists make no mention of the Son of God begotten by a giant phallus rising from the hearth. Don't let it get you down! Cynwolfe (talk) 16:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Is this some kind of systematic assault?[1] [2] Are we going back to the old days when we couldn't talk about ancient religion without making sure to condemn it from a Christian POV? Very sad. Very anti-intellectual. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

My errors

My mother died in January at age 96 still hoping that some day I'd be perfect :) EoGuy (talk) 03:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

storytelling

With you there. Roman mythology … thinking about a systematic overhaul there, with one-paragraph versions of the greatest hits, right after the lede, cuz really, that's what people want first. Linked to articles with the fuller treatment. Servius's flaming head and all that, Tarpeian Rock, squawking geese, Gaul distracted by raven, all that. Won't be as easy as it sounds; of course they'll be framed with why the Romans were telling these, and Uncle T.P wrote a whole book on Remus. Care to join me, though? I plan to tackle it in an utterly desultory, sporadic, slapdash fashion. Cynwolfe (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Look: what an unexpectedly affecting way to illustrate the top of the article "Chair"! Cynwolfe (talk) 01:07, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking Priesthoods of ancient Rome before Roman mythology, or maybe go at both at once? I also have to take definitive notes on an utterly unrelated subject from a book that's been recalled to the library, so my head is not in one place. "Priesthoods" will be tricky to do without replicating too much in other articles. "Of", and not "in" as with Religion in ancient Rome, because these are the specifically Roman ones that we have in the nav box — not, say, Cybele's priests even at Rome. Please plop anything there you'd like. Cynwolfe (talk) 20:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Di indigetes

Versnel has written something on the discoveries at Lavinium. Interesting a monument of the VII cent. (found in 1964) and and a cenotaph dedicated to Lar Aineas. It looks the identification of the Penates-Indigetes with Aeneas predates augustan times.Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Gladiator

Did you check out the list of G&R articles for 8.0? I don't know much about this, but I glanced through them and afterwards didn't recall seeing Gladiator, which ought to be included. I'll go to wherever and request it, but it's quite possible I just didn't notice. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, actually, I checked again and it's there. And rightfully so. I do wonder, though, whether the section "The Gladiators" ought not to be moved up, both because it's more to the point for my mythical Average Reader, and because the two sections "Gladiatorial Games" and "Outline of the games" seem as if they should be sequential. That's a lot of reading, though, to see whether one section assumes a sequential knowledge of the other, and I need to take a wiki-break, because at this point I feel as if I'm just messing up everybody else's work. Hope the digits are better soon. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I saw Imperial cult (ancient Rome) on my first go, soon after the posting. They're using an old version of Roman mythology; I'm supposing that the most valuable thing we could do from our shared to-do list would be that one, and ask them to use the version that's plumped up. I am just utterly without focus. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I was at the intro to Religion in ancient Rome yesterday, you may have noticed, to provide my usual overabundance of linkage, and was admiring how polished and clear it is. I have to present myself physically to the library to return a recalled book or face death (or a daily $25 fine), so I'm going to see if I can fetch Remus for the task at hand, and whatever of this list and this list I can lay hands on. Time is short for this revision. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete your comment over at that thar place? (I'm not really here; just dropping in once in a while.) Cynwolfe (talk) 23:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomex

Thanks a lot! --Andreateletrabajo (talk) 15:55, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Categories for Demeter and Ceres

Before I edited Demeter and Ceres (mythology), they were categorized in Category:Agricultural deities and in Category:Agricultural goddesses. As using the gender-specific category -- and only that category -- I removed them from the more general ones. I do not see how your comment on my talk page indicates that my removal was incorrect. Please provide a clearer explanation.  — AnnaKucsma  Speak! 20:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not arguing about whether the categories should exist, or whether Demeter and Ceres are associated with agriculture. My point was that since Agricultural goddesses is already a subcategory of Agricultural deities, neither page really needs to be put into both categories. The fact that they're agricultural deities is understood from the fact that they're agricultural goddesses. Hence, I removed each page from a single category: Agricultural deities.  — AnnaKucsma  Speak! 21:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.  — AnnaKucsma  Speak! 16:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

most amusing time

I've just discovered that Google has a Latin translator, and I will no doubt use it any time I have the blues and need a laugh — though to tell the truth, it often soars to the level of poetry. Since I gave it a patch of Tacitus, this was of course not the desired goal. Here for your amusement:

I loved this and had to share it — 5th c. BC (it says; i haven't seen anything like this before

Neque data senatus copia: intra cubiculum auditur, Messalina coram et Suillio corruptionem militum, quos pecunia et stupro in omne flagitium obstrictos arguebat, exim adulterium Poppaeae, postremum mollitiam corporis obiectante. ad quod victo silentio prorupit reus et 'interroga' inquit, 'Suilli, filios tuos: virum esse me fatebuntur.' ingressusque defensionem, commoto maiorem in modum Claudio, Messalinae quoque lacrimas excivit. quibus abluendis cubiculo egrediens monet Vitellium ne elabi reum sineret: ipsa ad perniciem Poppaeae festinat, subditis qui terrore carceris ad voluntariam mortem propellerent, adeo ignaro Caesare ut paucos post dies epulantem apud se maritum eius Scipionem percontaretur cur sine uxore discubuisset, atque ille functam fato responderet.

"Neither the Senate was granted within the room, listened to, the presence of Messalina, and the corruption of Suillio of the soldiers, them by bribes and indulgences to share in every crime, accused him bound by giving, then through adultery with Poppaea, and finally of unmanly. at this last that leaped out in the silence of the defendant and "Ask the 'he said,' of swine, thy sons, O: The man that I will admit it. ' and went in a defense, he moved profoundly in the manner of Claudius, Messalina also aroused tears. washing room, which warned Vitellius not to go out and they informed the senate to allow the defendant: the destruction of their existence to the haste to be with Poppaea, of subjects who are terrors of a prison to the hired agents to drive a voluntary death, Caesar meanwhile was so unconscious that a few days later that he was dining with asked her husband Scipio sat down to table without a wife, why, but he too, would answer the length by fate."

I'm particularly found of that last phrase, "would answer the length by fate." Cynwolfe (talk) 02:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Have you noticed the bottle, I mean bottom, of your talk page lately? Did you know that you're an agricultural deity, dear Dionysus? Cynwolfe (talk) 18:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Check email. Cynwolfe (talk) 20:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

An evil bot took my Eeyore away. Cynwolfe (talk) 05:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Your input sought

There is an SPI in which your name has been invoked. The primary issue has been resolved. I don't know whether you'd want to comment briefly on the secondary issues that have arisen (in which context you were referenced), but here's the link. Cynwolfe (talk) 12:35, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

RfA

Well, I let myself be persuaded Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elen of the Roads. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

What is this "Liverpool" of which you speak:) --Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:41, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Sancus

Have you an idea whence does the picture of the statue come from? Where was it found exactly? The article does not say anything: it looks like a drawing. As far as I know the Quirinal was sacked in XVI century, the location of the temple of Sancus is unknown. Platner too does not breach the topic: the collis Sanqualis or Mucialis must have been further from the Latiaris and near the Porta Sanqualis.Aldrasto11 (talk) 04:42, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I found everything. Extremely interesting and to the point I made some mistakes last time as I was writing by mem. Varro writes it was on the third hillop, as the 1st is the Quirinalis, the 2nd the Salutaris and the 3rd the Mucialis or Sanqualis, the most outwardly being the Latiaris.

I left a note on the Duenos inscription. In the archive some editors asked for newer interpretations, though I am not going to edit unless there is agreement that my edits will not come under fire.Aldrasto11 (talk) 05:57, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

laugh of the day

Is this not the funniest, most self-important thing you've read today? If you must edit here, please don't ever enjoy yourself! Cynwolfe (talk) 15:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

started list article

I started a list article on a user page that may be, dunno, dumb or unwise. It's called "List of ancient Roman altars," and it's here. I'm thinking of this in terms of topography, not function; that is, major named altars that are either worthy of an article or have sections in other articles (or potentially do). Please add anything you come upon. I started it and quickly realized it wasn't something I wanted to sit and do, but rather wanted to build as I came to things. When there's a sufficient number of entries to launch, it's meant to be linked to from the ara entry in the Glossary. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I just looked at the article auspice for the first time with my eyes actually open (usually I'm just peeking through the corner of one when I'm checking what the link is). Thanks for keeping at altars. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your very kind note. I've filed your link in my Google library and look forward to reading it when my latest whale gives me rest. After Ara Martis came up on our list, I was driven to realize what an odd thing the Mars (mythology) article was. The length of the list of provincial Martes was quite eye-opening; even though my interest in the Continental Celts had made me aware of how many local Celtic deities were identified with Mars, to see all these boys together set the gears whirring. Haven't checked to see who did all that. On the other hand, the list of provincial Martes was quite out of balance with the rest of the article. What I've done is only a start, but I want to keep it as simple and clear as possible, since the page gets upwards of 27,000 hits a month. I soon found myself in a bit of an unfocussed tizzy, brought to earth when my browser crashed from the weight of 52 pages open simultaneously. Will be adding sections on "Festivals and rituals," "Iconography and attributes," "Prayers and oaths," and all that. This will I hope eventually take me back to an article I started a jillion months ago, from which I became distracted by birth deities and topography. And will be useful prep for tackling Roman mythology again. Nor must I neglect the women, since — as Ovid notes with perplexity — the month of Mars begins with the Matronalia. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

A good addition?

Hi Davey. What do you think about this addition to our old friend's article? In my opinion it is a list of unimportant amateurish transcriptions, but I'd like to consult possible reverting. I don't want to be accused of an ownership :)) And last but not least, I would like just to say hello! I hope you and your family are OK. Best regards. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 17:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for resolving this problem, it was a good faith edit, but not very helpful. Sometimes (rarely) I cite blogs, I found some good English blogs focused on Czech jazz and culture, but this link could cause a confusion, as the "external links" section could turn into a collection of fansites and how-to-play guides. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Ayay, psoriasis is a persistent disease, one of my friends with the same problem underwent a treatment by the Dead Sea. Believe it or not, it helped! Don't forget to say hello and a wish of good health to your mother, Davey. Recently I was quite scared about my old grandmom (She's over 80, has become increasingly frail in recent times and was forced to go to hospital with the stomach). I was selected as the housekeeper and watchman in her house and some situations were pretty funny for me (I'm not good in housekeeping :)) Thanks God she is well now and everything is OK again. Uff. My life is very busy right now: in addition to my usual job (sheet music selling) I began to help in a completely different area: I make rain gutters, downpipes, window sills, I repair damaged or install new sheet metal roofs etc. Hard work, but well paid :) Btw, what's the English name for a tradesman specializing in this area? I can't find the profession here on Wikipedia. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

I still enjoy contributing here, during this weekend I created this and this (in collaboration with User:Hoary). And what about you? Still travelling in the streets of old Rome? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

To hell with original research, you should add a new section to the housekeeping article, I'll help you with all my power!! Seriously, my actions in this area were horrible and my (usually kind) relatives nicknamed me with cruel names. Then they left me in the kitchen full of water and dirty dishes. They call it a constructive criticism.

I could find out something about bloody ancient Romans in Moravia: Burgstall and Mušov are the first things that come to my mind. I'll let you know. Your comment (mainly the housekeeping part of it) was the funniest thing I've read or heard during this weekend :)) Thank you. Take care, and keep up the good mood :) --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Pins and nails

If you're strolling around JSTOR, could you tell me whether the plate referenced at the top of this article includes the inscribed votive nails described in Nortia, which I've been working on? I would love to find an out-of-copyright representation of these, drawing, photo, whatever. So far I haven't unearthed this volume free online, but it's dated 1916. I can get it locally, probably, with a great deal of effort, which I don't want to expend if it doesn't have the nails pictured. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

When I had access to the Elysium that is JSTOR, I don't remember not being able to see plates, but then, I don't recall how this worked, since it's been a while and they were always changing things. Some of these nails are inscribed with designs, perhaps "magic marks" as are sometimes prescribed in the PGM, and some have text. Conway seems to have been obsessed with this goddess Rehtia, and Whatmough did an article too, but I don't find anything recent, so people might've starting saying, oops, this is just a word, not a deity. Anyhoo, there is a pretty picture here, on p. 11, line drawing on p. 12, and the same photo again, though of lesser quality, here, on p. 170. These appear in books dated to the 1930s, I think it was, but when I saw the 1916 article had a plate, I wondered whether it might not be the same photo as these two, and in public domain. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I can just haul myself to the library and hold an actual book in my hand, someday, and scan it in. I have a list of things I should get hold of, so this is one more. Cynwolfe (talk) 01:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I need me a few of them pins 'bout now. The iron kind for a tongue defixio. But I'm really here to ask you to take a look at the imperially cultish section on Mars Augustus just added to the Big Boy's article. I'm not sure this is very cogent, but since the article is of general interest (approaching 30,000 visitors a month), I want to make sure these little rooms of prose have plenty of light and air. Detail relegated to footnotes. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Close one and they do not reappear as long as you don't log out. The exorcism must be repeated next time you log in. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, here's something truly benefical to mankind. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Fiscellus

I happened by chance to discover (to my shame) that Fiscellus is the name of a mount, from which the river Avens flows forming the lake of Cutiliae. So now the picture concerning the di indicetes named on the inscription mentioned in the article looks clearer: Fucinus, Fiscellus, Summanus and Tempestates are indeed local gods, or hypostases of gods which are one way or another connected with nature, earth and life on earth. Now I understand why the Italian scholars connected this lex templi with transhumance. Indeed from Aletri to Lake Fucinus one must cross mountains.

As for Tempestates they are to be found in other inscriptions in Northern Italy. So too for Iuppiter as Poeninus, Appenninus and various other epithets connected to place names: there is an article by Francesca Cenerini on MEFRA.

This confirms Dionysius's interpretation/translation of indiges as chtonios and perhaps even Macrobius's use of indiges for Hesiod's daimon.Aldrasto11 (talk) 14:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

This is just speculation: if the di indicetes are local and somehow chthonian gods, then the opposition indigetes-novensiles in the formula of the devotio can be understood as heavenly versus (under)worldly.

Transhumant shepherds and cattle of course should be careful about these entities, i.e. gods of the mountains and lakes they approach, weather deitites and the god of nocturnal lightningbolts.Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your appreciative comments. I wish I could do that addition but I am afraid this may be OR. I have no access to the article by Gregori and Galli. On the subject of local cults and theonyms I read the articles by F. Cenerini "Scritture di santuari extraurbani tra le Alpi e gli Appennini" and J. Champeaux "Sors oraculi..." which are very informative but do not mention in any way the di indigetes.Aldrasto11 (talk) 12:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

BTW it is curious that the Novensiles were supposed to have been institued by the Sabins near the Trebia: Trebia of Umbria apparently. These places are not too far from each other. If it was Trebia of Latium it would almost the same place. This mount is even nearer to Fiscellus.Aldrasto11 (talk) 12:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

The article by Gregori and Galli is a publication of the Museo Civico of Alatri and on line does not show. However I think I could cite it on the basis of what Gordon writes...The meaning of di indigetes is clearly defined as local and chthonic. Cenerini too speaks of local hypostases of great gods e.g. Iupiter (Summus Poeninus), Minerva..., Aponus Apollo perhaps.Aldrasto11 (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. I think our view is supported by the formula of the devotio which contrasts novensiles with indigetes. And while it looks the indigetes are local deities or local hypostases of other great gods it is on the other hand certain the novensiles are the highest heavenly council. Varro says somewhere that 9 is most powerful number and always associated with Heaven. This BTW is true in many cultures, e.g. in Asia and elsewhere. So the formula thereby is saying Heaven and Earth, the most removed, farrest and the nighest, next. But this is just speculation i.e. OR...Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

good hunting

I spent several minutes looking through the pharmaceutical company's site expecting there was a commercial catch but couldn't find it. Where did you find it? Cheers
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 15:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Piquant

Would you like to hear one of the stranger things that's ever happened to me? Me havin' no truck with superstitio. I just posted a section to Mars on his sacred animals, the woodpecker and the wolf. The second before I was about to hit save, a woodpecker (I kid you not) descended on the railing just outside my window, where he proceeded to peer into the window and chat earnestly for a good minute or so. Woodpeckers are normally rather shy, but this time of year they do start coming closer to the house, looking for food. But never that close, and never that chatty. We have two species of woodpecker that I see regularly. The other day, there was a dead one lying along the footpath, spotted when I didn't have a moment to give him a proper burial. I had never seen a dead woodpecker before, and I assume they normally linger in their woodlands to expire. I went out to get him later, and he had quite vanished. Oh sure, you say, the cat ate him — but when has a well-fed domestic cat ever shown interest in a dead thing? No sport in that. And it was the same of the two species as the individual who just appeared oblativa.

Cults have been founded on far less.

I come here also sheepishly, hat in hand, but only if you're doing your own thing and it's no trouble: [3] I've had this on my plate for over a year, and want to get it done before the holidays. Coverage of the topic is currently scattered; I've nibbled at the edges of it a couple of times in little peripheral articles, side trips it kept sending me on (Turris Mamilia, Di nixi, Ciconiae Nixae), but the time has come. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I applaud you for swearing mildly in an edit summary. Quite the risk these days ('specially considering someone once rapped me on the ass for making an uncivil comment about something I wrote myself). Cynwolfe (talk) 22:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

No, no end to the spewing of anti-social filth. (European badgers are so much handsomer than ours; here's a digression that really I should spin into a separate article — and lo, in the next section Mutunus Tutunus rears his, uh, head.) Cynwolfe (talk) 23:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

That is fantastic, and fantastically parallel … especially since I was thinking how one might preserve the splendid plumage. This one was a female, so more muted, but here she is. Cynwolfe (talk) 01:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Pluto

Did you look in the Pluto talk page at all! I started a discussion with no responses. 24.180.173.157 (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I just got frustrated 24.180.173.157 (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

But it appears the Romans did not have a deity called "Pluto" before associating their mythology with that of the Greeks. This site states "Haides was depicted as a dark-bearded, regal god. He was depicted as either Aidoneus, enthroned in the underworld, holding a bird-tipped sceptre, or as Plouton, the giver of wealth, pouring fertility from a cornucopia. The Romans named him Dis, or Pluto, the Latin form of his Greek title Plouton, "the Lord of Riches." In addition, Gods, goddesses, and mythology has no section on Pluto but it does on Jupiter, Mercury and the rest. 24.180.173.157 (talk) 01:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Bacchus

You've expressed some reservations about editing redirects and such, so forgive me if the following instructions are obvious.

If you want to start the article Bacchus, type Bacchus in the search field. You will be taken to Dionysus, but at the top of the article is a notice that you've been redirected there from Bacchus, which will appear as a blue link. If you click on this blue link, you'll be taken to the page that set up the redirect. Then you need only edit it as you would any other page, replacing the tiny amount of content you'll find there (the redirect command). No need to worry about the edit history, because this is not a move.

Sorry, in testing this I see my info is outdated! Bacchus is now a disambiguation page. Let me know when you're read to do this, and I'll find a way to get around it. Still need to get back to Argei too. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Did this for Argei — wouldn't edit that till an admin merges the edit history. Will do the same for Bacchus when you have content. Perhaps you could start this on a user page? Cynwolfe (talk) 14:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Liber and bull stuff

Two questions:

• Surely every Imperial bull sacrifice from the 2nd century AD following isn't a taurobolium? A quick glance at some of our most-used items (in my Google library) seems to suggest that it was only the particular bull sacrifice of Cybele. Commons says that our relief of Marcus Aurelius sacrificing capite velato is a taurobolium. Definitely not if the taurobolium is only Cybele's, or similar. You would know better than I about this in relation to Imperial cult.

• Is there any connection that you've seen so far between Liber and the notion of the "liberating" (liberatio) of an augural space? I doubt it, but it popped into my head. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all that insightful info. The taurobolium article seems better informed than many, so I kept asking myself if I was reading it wrong. I think I may have some dim memory that celestial Venus was attractive to 16th century poets. Cynwolfe (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Please watch Dii Consentes if you don't already. And please shoot me. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Have slept for a wildly uncharacteristic 10 and one half hours and feel better. I was reminded today of how interesting Vitruvius is on the subject of how a temple building should be expressive of the character of the deity housed within it, and just thought I'd toss this note on Ceres at you. I don't find Vitruvius cited often in our sources, so in getting around to working on Roman temple someday, it might be useful to seek out books specifically on Vitruvius and temple construction. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

First thing that pops into my head is how few gods overlap between the #Dii Consentes and Varro's agricultural marshalls: Jupiter, Ceres, Minerva, Venus. (Why on earth Minerva? And if Mars was even an agricultural guardian, why not Mars? Unless, of course, Fowler's right and Robigus is an — dare I use this word? — indigitamentum of Mars, that is, invoked to fix a particular protective power of Mars.) Ceres inside the city had to do with distributing the food supply, and outside the city with the mysteries of seasonal growth, the things that happen underground, thus V's instructions? Cynwolfe (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm posting a Lympha article today. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, tomorrow. Got distracted by Caelus, who of course was presented as another name for Uranus, those poor Romans, impoverished of spirit, imagination, and all that. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

What is this thing called a Wikipedia author I keep seeing with the faces of attractive though not dauntingly beautiful young women at the top of pages, like celestial deities? What makes one a Wikipedia author and not a mere Wikipedia editor or, heaven forfend, Wikipedia user? Cynwolfe (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Herr Wales is definitely chthonic, as is evident from the frog-like mien: Brekekekex koax koax. I think I keep getting them at Commons, because I'm not logged in, so each visit I guess is read as separate, and having closed the window before doesn't take. Each is called a "Wikipedia author," as if this were a socially acceptable good thing. Have you ever tried telling someone you don't know that you contribute Wikipedia articles? I can only bear so many pitying looks. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

That turned out to be tedious and not terribly rewarding. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Sakri

I found this correspondence with the epithet of the Vedic god Indra. I wonder why G. Devoto, G. Dumezil (and perhaps his later follower Woodward) missed it. According to the two WP articles on this entry the term means powerful, mighty. In Buddism it is a proper name, not an epithet. Devoto just noticed Tocarian sakaer lofty.Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Umbria

You're right, information about area and population are specific and are discussed below.Regards.--GiovBag (talk) 23:46, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Vitruvius and Ceres

{written before I got your last note.) When you said Vitruvius was proving to be illuminating, were you thinking of the following in regard to your diligence with the Aventine Triad and related matters?

Vitruvius, De architectura 1.7.2: "The temple of Ceres should be in a solitary spot out of the city, to which the public are not necessarily led but for the purpose of sacrificing to her. This spot is to be reverenced with religious awe and solemnity of demeanour, by those whose affairs lead them to visit it" (item Cereri extra urbem loco, quo non omnes semper homines nisi per sacrificium necesse habeant adire, cum religiose caste sanctisque moribus is locus debeat tueri).

Let me know if you find other English translations, as I find this one a little misleading. "The public" seems to represent "not all people" (non omnes … homines), though one might've inferred (I did before I checked the Latin) that the populus was meant. And for all I know that is what's meant; I thought it had something to do with controlling the people, like banning the celebration of the Compitalia. But it seems to be more like: "Likewise, [an aedes] for Ceres is outside the city, in a location to which not all people go, unless they have the necessity for the purpose of sacrifice, at which time this location ought to be regarded with religious awe and in a purified state, and according to religiously sanctioned procedures/customs." "At which time" is a perhaps undue expansion of cum, but I would go so far as to read cum here as "in which case" or "under which conditions", since it's a cum clause with a subjunctive. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to say, secondary material on this welcome to me, since mostly Vitruvius is dealt with for practical stuff, even though in this passage it's been noted that his theory clearly doesn't match practice, and may be wished-for Augustan orthodoxy. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:29, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Have the download. Replied before I saw the author. Tried to send second note on whome, and something very odd was happening. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Bloody hell. I feel like one of the Danaides today. Except that Wikipedia calls them "Daughters of Danaus." Cynwolfe (talk) 22:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

ho ho ho

Early Christmas present. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:10, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Further greetings via email. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

BCE-BC

I completely understand your point, but a quick look at the history of the article will reveal that this article has barely been touched by anyone save for myself and Aeonx, who's been very helpful in fixing problems with my editing. Therefore i didn't know to whom should i look for for consensus and deduced that since i already did a rather complete overhaul of the article i might as well change the style. If you don't agree with me, I'll aprreciate it if you could at least point out with whom should i form a consensus, regards--Macarenses (talk) 13:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Founding of Rome

I already touched on the problems of this article during the SPI. I find it inexplicale that such an uncritical presentation of the topic, marred even by racist remarks on the origin of the Roman aristocracy has been rated B. I made some remarks on the talk page (using my ohter account, as I was looking at the topic after writing on Etruscan issues) and there may have been an addition consequently but the general style of the article has been left unchanged.

I see the following major issues:

1) The content is presented uncritically and/or in a nebolous way. Even though it is acknowledged that the occupation of the site of Rome was a long standing process, there is no clear reference to archeological evidence or citation of ancient literary or epigraphic sources. Moreover the overview of the scholarly literature is totally lacking.

2) The article takes as its core point the discussion of the traditional date of the foundation without trying to interpret its motives.

3) The discussion on the date is focused on astronomic/astrologic arguments. While this point might well contribute decisive evidence, it is not currently at the centre of discussion in the relevant mainstream scholarship. The style of citation here as elsewhere is moreover unclear and at any rate not standard inline. While the authors quoted may be serious scholars they are not specialists of Roman history.

4) The argument that original Latin aristocracy was German or Celt because of their fair or red hair (in many cases) is obviously unacceptable as scientifically groundless being an instance of circular argumentation. Of course it is also racist. The article refers to a work by a Francis Owen, is he a serious scholar?

I wish to arouse your attention because this article is important.

I am doing some reading to challenge the main points I mentioned, I read Cornell who is interesting but does not give excessive attention to the issues the article focuses upon.Aldrasto11 (talk) 12:31, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Here's a toast to boredom and repetition. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Someone just vandalized my talk page. Eek. Ick. Sheesh. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Roman gods

Nice job on Ceres and Liber. Are you planning on improving articles on other Roman gods? Mercury, Neptune and Juno could use a some expansion, not too much, maybe as big as the Pluto article is; but Jupiter definately needs to be at least as long as the Mars article currently is. I don't mean to presure you though. LittleJerry (talk) 02:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Ditto, belatedly, on improving Ceres and Liber. You were also doing work on Orpheus recently. One of my missing links in Pluto (mythology) is Pluto in Orpheus's descent. This falls under his role as "possessor of a quest-object," I should think. My current question is whether "Hades" per se is ever the ruler who hears Orpheus's plea, or whether this is always going to be Plouton, because the myth expresses the theology of the mysteries. If you happened to see any discussions of the earliest evidence — in art, literature, or inscriptions — of this myth and Pluto's role, I'd be grateful. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Sancus

Thank you for your helpfulness on the previous issue. I think it will take some time to challenge that stuff. I read Cornell's Beginnings (the previewed part) and while it is a well informed work I do not see him as a sufficient authority (there are some mistakes too).

I am trying to deepen the article on Sancus as I found an interesting and unexpected aspect of this god in its relationship with Salus; 1. the medicines put in the belt of the statue of Tanaquil, 2. the location of the shrines and 3. the mysterious epithet Semonia shared by her and Semo S.

I have some trouble in retrieving the works of Wissowa and others (Rosenzweig and Marwood) on the subject which sometimes I managed to read on Google books as snippets, but now I cannot find again.

There aare conflicting views on the nature and antiquity of this entity Salus Semonia in the snippets I see on th American transactions and the Encyclopedia of religion and ethics. However Pliny usually has old sources.

If you have access to some of this material could you please help me in this task? Thank you very much in advance.Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the advice. Before reading your message I had already done a google book search which has been fruitful as it includes Norden and the Pauly: however Rosenzweig and Woodward were not in the 1st 4 pages. Luckily Norden quotes Rosenzweig literally. The Italian periodical Maia 2007 has an article, the snippet intriguingly says the semones were 12 gods(something to do with the Consentes?), unfortunately there is no authority cited in the snippet.

I found another quotation of Wissowa on the gelernte Kombination in Dumezil. The Pauly gives the ancient interpretions of the semones as semihomines: here again the Indigetes and sometimes Novensiles too were considered people who became gods.

William Balfour Winning (1838!) has a good insight into the Sabine Semienes to Semo as Nerienes to Nero. Also very interesting the parallel with old Prussian, and the remarks on the name of Rome and Cures, Quirinus.

On this topic I find it a bit stunning how scholars are repeating almost the same words about the sources and their interpretation but ignore the interesting and relevant issue of the medicines in Tanaquil's girdle. And, moreover, the fact that Semonia is just one, if the 1st, epithet of Salus. Semonia both in Macrobius and Tertullian is mentioned along with Seia, Segetia and Tutilina. Pliny skirts mentioning Semonia outrightly and avoids writing the name of Tutilina because it is religio to do so under the roof.Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, really a stimulating article. I read Macrobius and remember the story of the bulla that Vettius Praetexatus tells when explaining the meaning of his own name. I already remarked many charachers of the Saturnalia are Etruscan.

To the point, Palmer's presentation of the Etruscan material confirms my idea that Etruscan god Selvans is not Latin Silvanus: the inscription on the boy from Tarquinia may show in my view a Latin influence (however Palmer does not quote the inscription; I also suspect the goose below is indeed a swan). The similarity of the 2 names in the 2 languages brought about a folk etymology and a consequent interpretatio. Silvanus originally was the god of the woods silvae, while the Latin god of (private and public) boundaries was Terminus. However the inscription from Bolsena Selvans Sanchuneta cited by De Grummond proves Etruscan Selvans was Sancus. So do the bronze statues discussed by Palmer. The reproduction of the a statue of Selvans in De Grummond (ed.) Etruscan religion 2006 shows a young shaved man not too dissimilar from the statue of Semo Sancus.

The interpetation of Selvans as a civil god of good faith, oaths etc. has been 1st given by Bernardini Marzolla, an Italian scholar but not an official etruscologist, who has been unduely ignored by academic circles: his etymology is based on Sanscrit.Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:39, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Another important element that Palmer brought to my mind, if in passing: Sangus as the protector of oath was interpreted by Servius as related to the Latin word for blood sanguen, because oath were sanctioned by a sacrifice. Til now oaths are sanctioned with blood in some situations. Thank you again for the gift. I found a good presentation of Wissowa's interpretation of Sancus in Fowler The Roman Festivals....

Probably the scope of the questions raised by the interpretations of Sancus could be best dealt with by starting separate sections: 1. Sancus and Iupiter/Fides; 2. Sancus and Salus; 3. Sancus and Mars; 4. Sancus and Hercules.Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I noticed the link to Salus connects to Hygeia. The Roman Salus though is considered by scholars different from this Greek entity as being foremostly the goddess of the safety of the commonwealth: cf. the famous and mysterious augurium Salutis. Perhaps it was me the first one who saw a medical aspect of Salus in her connexion with Tanaquil's praebia...Palmer does mention only Sancus?!Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Interesting the etymology explored by R. G. Woodard: I think this IE rootstem *seh for semo etc. could well be also that of Etruscan Selvans, given its semantics (to ladle, flow, seep) and the fact that it has given saliva.Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I would very much appreciate your comment on the article Sancus. I would like to go deeper but I am afraid of embarking in endless academic discussions based on flimsy evidence...However the question of the Genius of Iupiter is intriguing as it has a correspondence in the Etruscan Penates: Fortuna, Ceres, Pales and Genius Iovialis.Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:48, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

God articles in other languages

Hello again, I noticed that certain foreign langauge Wikipedia articles on certain Greek gods are in much better shape then their English counterparts. (Zeus, Hermes and Poseidon) Translating it is easy but the grammar will be off. Is there a easy way to correct the grammar? LittleJerry (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, Davey, as you know I'm taking a break (thanks for your vigilance on my talk page) but checking my watchlist now and then. Saw your comments on this and wanted to endorse them. I've been troubled by an inconsistency for some time now that relates to this. First, we are advised to use primarily English-language sources unless such don't exist or are insufficient. Then, I've been seeing tags noting that an article may be expanded from its counterpart from the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia, or whichever WP — which makes sense when the article is on a topic that deals with Serbo-Croatian history or culture or geography, but not much sense when the article deals with an aspect of classical antiquity for which abundant Anglophone sources exist. You have accurately noted the inconsistency and potential problems. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

One I've been looking at in particular is the Portuguese language Hermes article. [4]. It uses English language sources for it's resources, so that shouldn't be a problem. LittleJerry (talk) 15:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and no I'm not know Portuguese but I can translate it with Microsoft Word. How about I post a tanslated portion of it in a sandbox and you can look it over? LittleJerry (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, how do I do that? LittleJerry (talk) 16:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks but I decided to simply tag it. LittleJerry (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Good luck. LittleJerry (talk) 18:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

May I suggest this as another reference. LittleJerry (talk) 01:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Various issues

Founding of Rome. I found some materail in ANRW 1972 by Pallottino and Poucet is old but good.

I looked for the discussion of the eclypse issue on Lacus Curtius but was unable to find it: may you tell me where is it exactly?

Duenos: reading the article by Vanth linked, who explains mitat as moitat I thought it could mean this was an exchange of tokens of betrothal between 2 families and this would fit with the dialogic sponsio. Only 1 token has been found. Sacchi's presentation supposes it was a monologic one, i.e. in its kind peculiar (he argues on the grounds of other scholars's contributions). Now if I put the 2 pieces together (Vanth and Sacchi's results) is this OR? Thank you for the attention.Aldrasto11 (talk) 05:00, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the links and the support. I see the arguing of the article is not well fouded. I am no expert on ancient astrology-astronomy but it looks either the director of the Budapest Platnetarium has other authorities or his arguing is untenable.

On Duenos I have reread Vine's article and it looks promising to put the results side by side. I finished Sancus and will edit Neptune.Aldrasto11 (talk) 04:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

vandalism

Hey, dropping in. I'm wondering whether it's time to seek semi-protection (WP:SILVERLOCK) for Religion in ancient Rome. Is it just my general frustration with WP that leaves me feeling it gets vandalized daily? According to this essay, it's normal for about 5% of edits to be vandalism; 50% is rare. I'd guess that vandalism constitutes at least half, if not three-quarters, of all edits to articles on my watchlist these days, but the Religion article seems to be a favored target. Hope all is well with you. Cynwolfe (talk) 03:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Venilia

While editing Neptune I came across a work by German liguist H. Petersmann (online summary by his wife and review on B. M. Class. Rev.). Even though the review is not quite good I found his interpretations worth considering. You might remember that time ago I left a note on a talk page on the issue of the interpretation of Neptune in Varro. Now what Petersmann thinks fits very well with my interpretation of Varro's passage of LL V 72. He is also in agreement with my view about the meaning of Salacia, implying the meaning of the sexual aspect of the generative function. However about Venilia his insight is not so good as he limits her meaning to that of good weather, calm sky. Now my idea was that if Salacia means sexual intercourse Venilia should represent its outcome, i.e. generation of a new life and birth: arrival over waters is a common image for birth in myths, as Saturn arriving at Latium on a ship, from god being borne as man or the mythologies of death represented as a crossing of waters, in this case meaning being borne in the underworld. Hit upon a chance I found a source online that confirms my view: unfortunately it is in German and is not referenced but as it looks written by a learned person it must certainly come from some scholarly work, perhaps by Wissowa or von Domaszewski. The webpage is: Druckausicht.Gutenberg spiegel-de/. The citations of ancient sources are plentiful. The relevant sentence is: "Da Venilia in den Indigitamenta aber auch als Goettin der Verlangens genannt wurde; so wird der Name wohl wie der der Venus erklaert werden muessen." How to solve the problem of using the plentiful material on this and other issues containted in this article by finding the original source of the webpost? Perhaps impossible task I know, but I tried: it is too tempting and the only hint to this aspect of Venilia. But perhaps you may know his authority: it does not give it. Thak you very much for your attention and help.Aldrasto11 (talk) 11:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I found it by myself after some digging. Luckily it is given in another better site: the excerpt is from L. Preller's Röm. Mythol.. The citation of Venilia as invoked at deliveries in the indigitamenta is from Servius. The fact that Venilia was considered the mother both of Turnus and of Canens by Ianus means clearly that she is the power of mothering children inherent in waters. Cf. Festus s.v. aqua. My hypothesis is quite correct. Astounding that no scholar had til now understood this simple question!Aldrasto11 (talk) 04:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

new book

Erich S. Gruen has an interesting new book. Cynwolfe (talk) 23:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Completely unrelated, but related to other WP concerns: I used to enjoy reading Robert Graves' mythography for its poetic and imaginative vision, and editing WP has utterly ruined that for me, since people insist on taking him straight as a source, instead of as an object of study in his own right. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)