Jump to content

Talk:Auraria Daciae

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Rjdeadly (talk | contribs) at 17:57, 7 February 2024 (Rjdeadly moved page Talk:Auraria Daciae (castellum) to Talk:Auraria Daciae: Remove unnecessary parentheses/disambiguator: Not a castellum but a castrum). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Abruttus

[edit]

The article present title (Abruttus) contradicts to WP:Title, because the most relevant modern sources (RAN: [1], and LIM: Culturii şi Patrimoniului Naţional, page 3) do not use the Abruttus denomination for the site. Furthermore, this medieval Latin name of the town is anachronistic in the context of the article (Roman Dacia). The name of the town was first attested in 1271 in the form Obruth which later developed into the form containing the vowel "a" [2]. Pascu's POV from the early 1980s could, of course, be mentioned, but his passing reference to Abruttus in the context of the article is not enough. Borsoka (talk) 06:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's quite reverse; the newer Obruth derived from Latin Abruttus since Abruttus is mentioned in antiquity. Saturnian (talk) 13:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Would you, please, add the reliable source upon which your above claim was based, since your claim obviously contradicts to the reliable sources cited above. Borsoka (talk) 13:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but first you have to tell me about the Dacian discoveries from Hungary as I asked you long time ago. Saturnian (talk) 13:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I do not understand your above remark. What is the connection between Dacian discoveries in Hungary and reliable sources proving the name of the castellum at Abrud? Borsoka (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The present title of the article remained unverified, therefore I will again move the article to the name used by official lists of archaeological sites (LMI, RAN). Otherwise, Pascu does not state that Abruttus was the town's ancient name. Borsoka (talk) 19:25, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
According to [1] Abruttus was the ancient name of Abrud. He mentions it as
  • ABRUD. Orășel din Transilvania, în munții Apuseni (Jud, Alba). Veche așezare dacă și romană cu mine de aur (Abrut, Abruttus)." [1] translated
  • ABRUD. Town in Transylvania, in the Apuseni Mountains (Alba County). Ancient Dacian and Roman settlement with gold mines (Abrut, Abruttus)."
Historians know very well that around Roman forts the settlements developed and these settlements included the forts. So the settlement name is the same as the fort name! Even if RAN doesn't mention this name, it does NOT matter because as it is in the case of Apulum (castra), RAN also doesn't mention the ancient name. Saturnian (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ O.G. Lecca: DICTIONAR ISTORIC, ARHEOLOGIC SI GEOGRAFIC AL ROMANIEI, BUCURESTI, EDITURA UNIVERSUL S. A., 1937, p. 7
Therefore, the Abruttus name for the castellum is not substantiated by modern source. The above source from 1937 does not state that Abruttus is documented from Roman time. The source I cited above ([3]) states that a similar name (Obruth) was first documented in 1271. Borsoka (talk) 13:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Auraria Daciae (castellum). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Auraria_Daciae&oldid=1204675267"