Talk:Pompeii

Discovery

I heard that Pompeii was readiscovered when a person was digging a well and discovered a building —Preceding unsigned comment added by Videovideo (talk • contribs) 13:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

It was a worker digging a well and he hit a piece of polished marble —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sehorn (talk • contribs) 18:04, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

True but it was the theatre of Herculaneum, not Pompeii. Happened in the early 18th century and it was the first major discovery relating to any of the buried cities (Fontana, in 1599, didn't follow his up). The subsequent dig into the theatre didn't give an idea that there had been a city close by though, and modern archeologists regard it as a rather crude act of treasure hunting, unsophisticated and destructive even for its age. See Michael Grant's Cities of Vesuvius (1971). Pompeii wasn't discovered until 1748 and isn't mentioned at all in any surviving Roman text known in the 18th century (Pliny's letter doesn't mention the town either; his uncle aimed for Herculaneum) . Strausszek (talk) 03:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Rave

I must say that this is one of the best compillings of information about Pompeii that I have ever seen. I was unaware of the earthquake that took place before the eruption, thanks to everyone who had a part in this. -Jenny Ambrose, 15, North Carolina.

Modern Figures in Pompeii

I'm thinking of adding a new section detailing the contributions of various figures in contributing to our knowledge of Pompeii, for instance, detailing the work of Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, John DeFelice, Estelle Lazer, Sara Bisel, Allison Cooley, Penelope Allison, Joseph Deiss etc. Would it be worthwile adding it? Which other historians and archaeologists should I do? Would it perhaps be better to outline modern perspectives of Pompeii as a whole to examine the changing interpretations of the site? --Lord Pheasant 04:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Pliny Text

Just a note to myself and anybody else wishing to contributed to the article: The Pliny text is important to have in this article, but since the same text is now in the Pliny article, I think it this text should be integrated into the main body of the Pompeii article. Since this is the only reliable historical account of the destruction I think this text should go there. Much of the text should be removed and there should be more of a focus on eruption itself and not on the two Plinys. --maveric149

Done --maveric149, Friday, April 19, 2002

DID YOU KNOW!!! The earliest ever brewery coaster was founded in Pompeii

I regret I wasn't able to explain immediately what I had done, moving Pliny's text to Pliny the Younger, but I had serious connection problems and had to surrender after a number of timeouts, so I did not even complete the page on Pliny and the whole resulted perhaps in a sort of blitz. Fundamentally it is what effectively maveric did. I regret I de facto forced others to do what I intended and had to. Thank you maveric! :-) --Gianfranco, Saturday, April 20, 2002

No reason to apologise. The text as it was needed to be moved to the Pliny article and also simplified for the Pompeii article. We all have been having problems with the speed of the site lately. BTW, you have done a great job with this article --- I did improve some of the grammar for you, but the info is great. --maveric149

Pompey

There should be some reference to Pompey. -- Error 02:41, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Earthquake Date

my book of archeology says, the earthquake was 62, this article says 63. which one is right? -- 141.53.194.251 14:27, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

• My book also said it was in 62 so I updated it. If someone finds out that both our text-books were wrong here I also editted 62 and 63. --John Lynch 08:33, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Where to Include Stuff Question

Where would people suggest we include information in the article on life of Pompeii? Such as the fact that baths existed outside of the city walls for people who worked outside the walls to wash themselves in? Or the fact that the Pompeiians weren't expecting a death at all as there is evidence they were rebuilding places, such as the forum better then before and had barred carts from entering the forum because of how good the new floor was? --John Lynch 14:20, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm trying to re-organise it around a more chronological framework, which should make this easier, and also to merge out stuff on the eruption itself and Pliny's account (both of which have wider ramifications than just for Pompeii) to Mount Coronet Neddyseagoon 16:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)neddyseagoon

I think this sounds like a good idea and these details would provide a more complete picture. AlexandreaAdams (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)AlexandreaAdams

Walk on ruins

I heard that Pompeii is unusual in that you can freely walk on the ruins and touch the remains. Is that true? Can people touch the frescoes? Something should be said about the visit rules and touristic importance of Pompeii for the Naples(?) area.

No you can't touch the frescoes :( However you can walk about and walk through the city. But within reason touching things was a big no no. You couldn't walk on the frescoes that were on the ground, etc.--John Lynch 11:46, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Frescoes were strictly done on ceilings and walls, never(!) on the ground.--Luxgratia (talk) 15:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Some of the buildings are open and you can touch Frescoes. Well that is, they are touchable. I've touched them. Whether you're allowed to or not, I'm not sure! ForkieTMS (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Of course it is not permitted to touch them. If it was they would soon wear off completely. Most of the finest have been either moved to the museum in Naples or been encased in glass, but as Pompeii is such a large site some have been left unprotected, with the result that they are withering fast, both as a result of the weather and from people touching them. So please, next time resist your urge to touch them. --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Breezy style, but accurate information

Our anonymous friend 205.188.116.131 may not have the formal style quite mastered yet, but his information was perfectly accurate and appropriate. The wells did dry up before the eruption (I added further material along those lines, although my date of "65 AD" may be a year or two off, it's from memory); and the Vulcanalia (q.v.) were a real festival in honor of the Roman god of fire, and did indeed take place every year on August 23. (On the other hand the bit about August being in winter is egregious nonsense, and I removed it. The calendar was totally reformed by then, even including the slight error in the reform itself, which was corrected by Augustus: August 23 was almost the same August 23 we know now. Gradually, the Julian calendar went out of sync with the seasons again, but very slowly, and in the 1st century, it was not off by 1 day yet.) — Bill 16:29, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Pick a day

The article (and discussion on this page) say the eruption was August 23rd. The page on Vesuvius, the Today In History pages and Robert Harris's book say the eruption was on the 24th. Anyone know for certain? Zac (--202.154.157.204 12:32, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC))

I would also have to ask, by which calendar system. -- Beland 03:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Minor Edit

The inhabitants of Pompeii, as those of the area tozay, had long been used to minor tremors and wisps of gas from Mt. Vesuvius, and in 62 there had been a series of earthquakes serious enough to cause structural damage to houses in town; and in early August of 79, all the town's wells dried up; but the warnings were not sharp enough, and the Roman world was stunned when on August 24 a catastrophic volcanic eruption of the volcano buried the city and obscured the sun on a mild afternoon.

This sentence seemed a bit long and unnecessarily complex, edited into too. Jayhawk88 21:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Reburying Erotic Frescos

"Some have theorized, without proof, that Fontana initially found some of the famous erotic frescoes and, due to the strict modesty prevalent during his time, reburied them in an attempt at archaeological censorship." ... I'm no uncited theorist, but given the unbridled Catholicism rampant in 1599, if Fontana didn't destroy the frescos outright it seems he may have been trying to protect them. Would it be too much to add "or preservation"? Pjrich 05:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes i agree with Pjrich.Jee 04:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC) Me too. Nanotech64 10:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanotech64 (talk • contribs)

What does it mean by "lost?"

If we've preserved the writings of Kirby, and he mentions Pompeii and Herculaneum, presumably people who read him must have known that some city by the name of Pompeii existed and was overwhelmed by Vesuvius. Does the term "lost" simply mean that their locations were forgotten, or does Pliny not actually mention the two cities by name in his writings and only mention the eruption?--Rob117 00:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The locations were lost, which isn't very strange as the towns were covered under five to fifteen metres of rock and the area suffered many later upheavals. Except for the very first days after the disaster at Pompeii, there was no option to even think of going "treasure-hunting" in the period up to the actual digs in the mid-18th century. Plus, Pliny's letters were not that widely read in the middle ages and his epistle doesn't indicate Pompeii at all. Nor does any ancient author, the only mentions of Pompeii we have are in inscriptions found later than 1750, excepting a single one uncovered by Fontana which mentioned an officiual at Pompeii - but the fact that it indicated a city name that was unknown at the time was ignored. Herculaneum is mentioned in a few Roman books though.Strausszek (talk) 10:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Recordings?

I've seen this link passed around now: that the grooves on pottery found in Pompeii are actually recordings. I say it is a spurious claim and would like to see it refutted. I don't think the Romans had pzieoelectric devices.

Truth is that I remember playing recordings with no electric or electronic device whatsoever. Pure mechanics, and using a hand crank with a clockwork style governer and a steel needle with a diaphram and long parabolic horn, they were quite loud! we called them 78's and i still have some, and still have the needles in a cool little tin with the image of the dog listening to the music. prior to the disc it was a tube, a cylinder, and I believe that the ancients had more than we know, and that it would be easy to play those grooves if we wanted to. It was a two way mechanical process. I later became a sound engineer for many years. moza 12:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I heard about this kind of accidental "paleo-recordings" a few years ago, and the idea is quite intriguing of course. The supposed mechanism sounds sensible to me, though the recording would be very unfocused because the potter would have nothing that gathered in the sound, amped it (analogous to a mike or early recordings which were made by speaking into a wide funnel narrowing and leading to the membrane. The Romans or Greeks wouldn't have any means of actual playback either. But on principle it seems logical you'd be able to sift out a very rough recording and process it with modern equiipment, if you can calibrate the correct spped (were ancient potters actually able to get, like, one turn a second or faster? with purely acoustic recording you need a higher rpm rate than with the later 33 rpm LP). But then, on the earliest known and published sound recordings - a few seconds of a man singing in French about 1860, relocated just a year or two ago - it's not very easy to catch the sound either behind the flow of crackle. Strausszek (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hotel Murecine

I have been to Pompeii many, many times and know its geography well. I have never heard of The Grand Hotel Murecine. Where is it, please?--Anthony.bradbury 14:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Ame here, never heard about this. It's not to find at the Eschbach. Kenwilliams 13:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No I have never heard of it either and I live close by. To be totally honest I don't think it exists. It has probably been made up. JBeeldman 17:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It is cited in an article published in a major Italian newspaper, La Repubblica. Link: http://www.repubblica.it/online/cultura_scienze/corpi/pompei/pompei.html GhePeU 11:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Pompei vs Pompeii

Does anyone know why English speakers spell it Pompeii and Italians spell it Pompei (the ruins as well as the modern town)? --87.18.216.215 00:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)... your point is

Ei versus eii

The spelling Pompeii derives from a time when Germanic archaeologists were prominent in archaeological writing. Because the pronunciation of the dipthong 'ei' is pronounced in German (and also phonetically) like the english word 'eye' making the possible pronunciation 'Pomp-eye' the extra 'i' was added to avoid this mispronunciation. 203.27.90.186 03:25, 28 September 2006 (UT)

It should really be spelled Pompei. Wikipedia should set the record straight and remove the ridiculous spelling of Pompeii.

The above about Germanic archaeologists is a complete mare’s nest. The “ridiculous spelling” of Pompeii happens to be the Latin form of the name, a second declension plural. The Castiglioni-Mariotti Latin dictionary gives Pompeii, orum. There’s a certain logic, after all, in using the Latin name for the ancient city and Pompei for the Italian town. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Campolongo (talk • contribs) 09:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Pompeii

Ņŝ Ûso for the matter of the volcano, the entire sister city of Herculaneum, will forever be a mystery. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.252.219.187 (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

I am mystified by the above comment; anyone else? Strausszek (talk) 04:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Cut Trivia

Cut the following:

In an episode of Highlander: The Series, the character Joe Dawson explains that the eruption may have been caused by two immortals fighting on holy ground (considered taboo).

This seems a very trivial bit of info, not to mention that it's a line of dialogue. It would be one thing if the entire episode took place in Pompeii, but not a single line. It would be like including a note about the film Mystery Men because the Ben Stiller character says "I'm going to go Pompeii on your ass!" RoyBatty42 19:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Request link to Cyark's online Pompeii data archive

Hello.Cyark is a nonprofit hi-definition heritage network employing 3D laser scanning at UNESCO sites worldwide for educational purposes, and has partnerships with prominent University and national institutions worldwide including UC Berkeley in California, University of Ferrara in Italy, ITABC, American Museum of Natural History, etc. (please see here for a complete list). We would like to have a link to our extensive online database on the Pompeii Wikipedia page, if possible. Would a senior editor consider placing this up? Thanks.

• CyArk Hi-Definition Heritage Network (nonprofit) Pompeii page: QTVR panoramic images, 3D laser scans, quicktime movies, photos, site map, site info

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyark (talk • contribs) 22:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the link got deleted while someone was reverting vandalism. Since it appears to meet the standards of WP:EL, I will re-add the link. --Seattle Skier (See talk tierS) 21:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Popular culture section

The popular culture section for this page is really getting way overblown, with numerous obscure and non-notable references. Does anyone else agree that the article would be improved if all, or nearly all, of the text in that section was obliterated? (Using pyroclastic flows to do it might be fitting.) Mlouns 01:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think you're probably right. There isn't much actual content in there is there. Ditch it, I say. Eve 11:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

If I hear no further objections, I plan to take out pretty much the whole section in the next day or so. Mlouns 18:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Vesubius eruption?

I've heard some people saying that the volcanoe was not the Vesubious, that this is one of the most extended wrong information. I've been told by some friends of mine (that do not know among themselves) that there was (there is?) a nearby volcanoe and it was that other one (I've been told the name, but right now I don not recall it), I have even been told that the Vesubious was not active by that time.
Is there any truth in this? Is it just another urban legend?

Transportation

Under the Heading "Pompeii Today", the article states:

"The ruins are only accessible to tourists through the train line to the modern town, or else a private train line, the Circumvesuviana, that runs directly to the ancient site."

This is untrue. One can also catch a SITA bus from the SITA bus station in the port area in Naples. The bus stops on the main road through modern Pompei around the corner from the Information Centre. The entrance of the ruins is a 200 metre walk up hill from the Information Centre.

Take care with this route. There is no indication from the road of the ancient ruins close by. Note that the bus stop is the first one after leaving the freeway.

The bus stop to Naples is on the opposite side of the road.

The above route to Pompeii taken on June 20, 2007.

BinthareBinthare 10:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Replacing inaccurate CG image with more accurate version

File:Pompeii the last day 1.jpg

Current image

This is a very rough outline, NOT what the final image will look like.

I should explain that the image was obviously created with dramatic license for TV viewers. Artistically it's a great image but reading the caption of its depiction, I'm obviously not the only one bugged by some pretty obvious inaccuracies. For me the most irritating is how close Vesuvius seems to be in relation to Pompeii as well as its overall appearance. While I've never been there, on Google Maps it looks to be quite further away making a depiction of it looming over the town inaccurate. I've also seen pictures of art from Pompeii showing the mountain as being taller(more pointed) and green. However I agree with all the points made in our caption, so the city itself should look like it's in the process of slowly repairing damage from previous earthquakes.

To be clear, with a lot of work, I think I can create an image which looks just as good but takes into account historical knowledge ignored by the screenshot meeting this criteria:

• 1 Quality equal to or exceeding Image:Pompeii the last day 1.jpg
• 2 Larger depiction of Pompeii including damage both being repaired and in some cases waiting for repair
• 3 Placement of Vesuvius in a more accurate location, with farms/villas between it and Pompeii.
• 4 Attention to areas I may have missed from other editors.

Anynobody 23:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's an accurate photo. Vesuvio from Pompei

But, remember that the old caldera was much bigger, and the whole top blew off, so the original image was not far off.

187.132.70.251 (talk) 05:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Mountains rising over a plain have a knack for appearing closer and more dominating than they actually are. It's hard to judge distances if you're looking towards a high mountain five to fifteen miles away across a flat or slightly rising plain with no big villages or towns to gauge distances. Strausszek (talk) 06:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Pliny the Elder/Younger

I have reverted the latest edit relating to comments about the veracity of Pliny's account of Vesuvius's eruption. Who are the historians who question his account? We are not told at all. On the contrary, volcanologists have used his account and verified details which non-scientific historians have apparently queried. Please refer to the Pliny articles for confirmation. Peterlewis (talk) 10:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Peter. Brian Brennan (Macquarie University) is one such historian, as is his colleague Estelle Lazer. The various troubles with Pliny's letter as a source mostly arise when it is taken as gospel. I agree that non-scientific historians are a problem, but so are non-historical scientists!! So for instance, when Pliny writes that he saw clouds "between 2 and 3 in the afternoon," who is to say that time marks the beginning of the eruption? He may not have noticed those clouds until they were well-developed. And yet the official "time" of the eruption is still based upon pseudo-facts from his letters. Brennan has said outright that any attempt to assign times to stages of the eruption is ridiculous - so the much-lauded "Pompeii: The Last Days" isn't as accurate as it purports to be. Other problems of reliability stem from the fact that the letter was written decades after the event it describes. In addition Pliny was miles away from Pompeii, resulting in further inaccuracies in timing stages of the eruption from his account. None of these things mean the letter should be discounted, but they do mean it should not be relied upon so heavily as it is. If anyone reading this can get their hands on a copy of "Pompeii and Herculaneum: interpreting the evidence" by Brian Brennan and Estelle Lazer, that'd be an ideal source to cite with regards to controversy surrounding the reliability of Pliny. It could help with writing a passage on daily life in Pompeii, too. Beruthiel (talk) 23:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Agree, and one should be clear that Pliny doesn't even mention Pompeii or Herculaneum, nor does he ever describe the impact on them - he's taking it for granted of course, everyone knew the area had been destroyed and buried. And concerning timings, in any case, his sense of time spans must have grown a bit hazy after the sky had gone pitch dark and his uncle had left, plus he was retelling it 25 years later.

Two ancient Roman writers - Valerius Flaccus and Cassius Dio - mention a thundering sound at the outset of the eruption; Michael Grant in his book, Cities of Vesuvius, surmises that it was the sound of the mountain cracking open and finding a new outlet, and that seems very likely. The same kind of bellowing was heard at some eruptions of Vesuvius in modern times. Pliny doesn't mention it, most likely he didn't hear it. Strausszek (talk) 05:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

ES Posthumus

Aloha. As an anon IP, I can't add the "Category:E.S. Posthumus songs" tag to it. Can someone else do it? Cheers! 62.72.110.11 (talk) 08:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Pompeii in popular culture

pink floyd did a documentary on a live session of the band in pompeii

98.218.1.227 (talk) 04:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

U.S.A. Units?

Why, when this subject is in Italy, a half-world away, does the article exclusively use obsolete units from the U.S.A? 187.132.70.251 (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Unless the article is using Roman miles I agree that the metric system should be used for this one. You are welcome to convert the figures yourself. --Saddhiyama (talk) 18:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

While these units remain the primary units of measure in the U.S.A., they are not "obsolete" nor are they obsolescent. Since those countries that still use the metric system are unlikely to change over any time soon, we will have to put up with both systems for the foreseeable future. Of course, Italy has a national language and (as of my last visit) it still isn't English. The metric units should be included, particularly since in some English-speaking countries the Metric System is in common use. (Note that there are articles in other languages, e.g., http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pompeya )

74.69.156.48 (talk) 00:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Italian version is better!

The Italian version, "Scavi archeologici di Pompei" [[1]], is way more informative, and better laid out. Considering everything, including that Pompei is in Italy, I think it would be better if the Italian article was translated and transferred to the English version
187.132.70.251 (talk) 19:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

I don't have a problem with any of the pictures, but if there is a need for more, I would be happy to donate some from my trip there. LastWarrior2010 (talk) 12:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Typo?

The dog photo's caption reads: "Cast of a dog that archaeologists believe was chained outside the House of Vesonius Primus, a Pompeiian fuller". Should that be 'Pompeiian *ruler*'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.154.3 (talk) 18:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

No typo, a fuller is a guy who prepares wool and linen (or so I think): see fulling. The name of the director Samuel Fuller is derived from this line of work. Strausszek (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Date of the AD 79 eruption

As is now noted briefly both´in this article and at Mount Vesuvius, the date of August 24 is not completely certain or universally accepted. Some archaeological evidence at Pompeii suggests a date in the autumn, October or November - presumably the 24th of either of those months. Fresh olives were harvested and stored in jars, wine containers had been sealed which would happen towards the end of October, the people were dressed in warmer clothing than you'd expect for August, and a conmemorative coin issued for the emperor Vespasian, and likely put out in September - he had died in June - was found. It seems hard to find any authoritative discussion of this in English, there's an article in American Journal of Archaeology: S. J. Sparks 1982. The eruption of Vesuvius in AD 79: reconstruction from historical and volcanological evidence. AJA 36. p.39-51 that no one seems to have checked - and some diiscussion in A. Scarth and J.-C. Tanguy, "Volcanoes of Europe", 2001, Oxford University Press; ISBN: 0-19-521754-3). Again, would be good to check - I nipped those references from the talk page on Mount Vesuvius.

Then there's the Italian article by Stefani, 2006, briefly summarized by the Italian piece at www.capitoloprimo.it (which is at the footnotes both here and at Vesuvius). I know Italian well enough to see that the description given here of her findings is accurate, but it would be good to have more sources plus I'm rather sure it's been discussed before. It's not a flyblown fringe theory. The difficulties with an August date are real and the possibility that some monk made a scribal error during the Middle ages is plainly there - the text of Pliny we have relies on a very few early medieval surviving codices, which were then copied. So it would have been easy to make a slip of the pen - we know someone did, because the alternate date of Nov. 23/24 is in the text tradition and both dates can't be right.

Article in English: G.Rolandi et al. The 79 AD eruption of Somma: The relationship between the date of the eruption and the southeast tephra dispersion. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 169 (2007). From its Abstract:

... New high level wind data collected at the weather stations of the Aereonautica Militare data centres at Pratica di Mare (Rome) and Brindisi have been compiled to characterize the prevailing wind condition in the Somma-Vesuvius region. The common north-easterly dispersal directions of the Plinian eruptions are consistent with the distribution of ash by high-altitude winds from October to June. In contrast, the south-easterly trend of the AD 79 products appears to be anomalous, because the eruption is conventionally believed to have occurred on the 24th of August, when its southeast dispersive trend falls in a transitional period from the Summer to Autumnal wind regimes. In fact, the AD 79 tephra dispersive direction towards the southeast is not in agreement with the June–August high-altitude wind directions that are toward the west. This poses serious doubt about the date of the eruption and the mismatch raises the hypothesis that the eruption occurred in the Autumnal climatic period, when high-altitude winds were also blowing towards the southeast. New archaeological findings presented in this study definitively place the date of eruption in the Autumn, in good agreement with the prevailing high-altitude wind directions above Somma-Vesuvius ...

Q Valda (talk) 15:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Definition

Pompeii is a ruined and partially buried Roman town-city near modern Naples in the Italian region of Campania, in the territory of the comune of Pompei. Along with Herculaneum, its sister city, Pompeii was destroyed, and completely buried, during a long catastrophic eruption of the volcano Mount Vesuvius spanning two days in 79 AD.
Some words seem superfluous and contradictory ... --Q Valda (talk) 19:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit vague, but the first of those (ruined and partially buried) probably points, in part, to its present state - the city is not fully excavated, likely never will be, and it is certainly still in ruins. The phrase at the end - destroyed, and completely buried - on the contrary, seems to refer to 79 AD and what happened then. Both "destroyd" and "completely buried" are true at that point in time, and just because a city is destroyed it doesn't have to mean it is buried or utterly mauled to shreds. Strausszek (talk) 11:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Pompeii today is a ruined and partially buried town, and in 79 AD was destroyed, and completely buried. I think, first words 'ruined and partially buried' are worth to remove ... --Q Valda (talk) 08:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Etymology

pompe (in Oscan) = "5" /Etymology: The name is usually explained from the Oscan *pompe 'five', derived from the IE root *penkwe 'id.' Probably, the name refers to five original villages. from: http://xoomer.virgilio.it/asciatopo/campania.html Böri (talk) 09:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Ambiguity in Section "In Popular Culture"

The paragraph contains the lines: "The books have a cult following and students have been known to go to Pompeii just to track down Caecilius's house.[32] It was the setting for the British comedy television series Up Pompeii! and the movie of the series."
This incorrectly implies that Caecilius's House was the setting for "Up Pompeii". It needs re-wording to emphasise that "It" refers to Pompeii...
86.25.120.253 (talk) 11:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

That is a good observation. Feel free to reword the sentence yourself, after all everyone are allowed to edit Wikipedia. --Saddhiyama (talk) 12:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

In the same section, I think Cities in Dust was more about the risk of a nuclear war and the general fear of future cataclysm, very much at the fore in the 1980s. ´Though she ,may be using Pompeii as a symbol. the song isn't about Pompeii Strausszek (talk) 14:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

3D Models of Pompeii

There are detailed 3D Google Earth models of many of Pompeii's buildings in the 3D warehouse at: http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/cldetails?mid=33c16ce88b0dfd9cdfd89dd71a555b12

An External Link was added to this article pointing to the above page, but was reverted again.

Is there any reason why such an external link should not be added? If a picture tells a thousand words then a 3D model replaces a thousand pictures.

There are numerous other Wiki pages that contain external links to 3D Google models so it would seem inconsistent to exclude such a reference in this page. Examples include:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adler_Planetarium_%26_Astronomy_Museum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnos_Grove_tube_station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BankWest_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergen_op_Zoom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackfriars,_Newcastle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryggen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundeswehr_University_of_Munich
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_Al_Arab
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Greg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauburji
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_Tower,_Faisalabad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheong_Fatt_Tze
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Museum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_Schonell_Bridge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89glise_de_la_Madeleine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhibition_Park,_Newcastle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferntree_Gully_railway_station,_Melbourne
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaylord_Family_Oklahoma_Memorial_Stadium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibside
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giza_pyramid_complex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giza_Necropolis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Teatro_Falla
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huayna_Picchu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keep
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King's_College_Chapel,_Cambridge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwait_Towers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laing_Art_Gallery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machu_picchu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medvedgrad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megyeri_Bridge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcastle_town_wall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navy_Pier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Computing_Center
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennybacker_Bridge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Centre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_City_Hall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Mar%C3%ADa_del_Naranco
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Arabic_Studies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Johannisburg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Arabic_Studies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_the_Future_(Yalta)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Street
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadium_MK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Castle,_Newcastle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Metropolitan_Government_Building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towers_Hall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turner_Field
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Assembly_Building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Wright_College

Pmolsen (talk) 06:15, 24 October 2010 (UTC) Pmolsen (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2010 (UTC)