|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Strabo as a historian: since his Historia is lost, it can't be genuinely useful to the reader to place him in the category "Roman era historians". unless the point is simply to fill the category with as many names as possible. --Wetman 20:42, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- But perhaps it's worth listing even a historian whose work is mostly lost, especially when geographical writing often verges onto the historical and given that Strabo quotes or repeats material from his histories in his geography. The entry in say the oxford classical dictionary will definitely have something to say about him as historian. (Though maybe that's only because classicists thrive on writing about texts which are no longer exist.) Flounderer 04:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- If the work of Michelet or Barbara Tuchman were lost today, would they be any the less of a historian? It's true that in Category editing, I see a lot of nonsense merely designed to puff up the category (although most of the category inflation in fact seems to be the creation of silly categories, like Category:One-legged Brazilian lesbians...); but conversely it seems odd to ignore a person's work just because it hasn't survived — history has been too cruel already. Bill 09:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Very good points, Bill and Flounderer. --Wetman 16:38, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Is it lost or not?
It says "Strabo's History is nearly completely lost" but then in the later section describes how most of it has survived. And then it says that what exists is copies of copies. I think the phrase is "nearly completely lost" is a strong opinion given we have so much material in fact.
- The article is fine. The History is almost completely lost except two or three sentences quoted in other ancient authors. The Geography — a different work — is almost completely extant. Bill 12:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
The first paragraph reads like it should belong in a disambiguation page, with the rest of the article relocated to Strabo (Historian) or something along those lines. Does anyone else think it's a good idea? --Ori Livneh (talk..contribs) 07:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good. --Eyrian 14:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
what does this mean?
- The text was added by User:184.108.40.206 on 5 February 2011: . Bizarrely this user used a gold font on some of the letters: "Cassiterides is out of this". Presumably he/she was trying to make a point with the use of font colours - but it does seem incomprehensible, and so presumably should be deleted. It's hardly surprising that Strabo "is not completely free from mistakes" anyway. Pasicles (talk) 19:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Okay I was able to find the reference provided on Google book search, and the book in question does indeed say matter-of-factly "Strabo unfortunately is not completely free from mistakes" but there is nothing in the book about the Cassiterides, so I've expunged the line. Pasicles (talk) 19:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
In this section the article reads - "and although politically he was a proponent of Roman imperialism. . ." This sounds strange and anachronistic. Roman expansionism, Roman cultural influence, Roman civilization, yes. Cutugno (talk) 08:15, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Undo, 17 March 2015 & Comments
Just undid an edit about 'flying Indian reptiles' because it inadvertently superimposed images over the article body. If someone wants to try the edit again, the material appears to have been unsourced.
This article uses nonstandard notation to reference some facts. Could some competent editor with knowledge of Strabo please eliminate it and harmonize all the references? Tapered (talk) 04:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
I deleted the unsourced statement, "These descriptions sound like the small Rhamphorhynchus," which seems to be nothing but speculation (especially since Rhamphorhynchus lived in the late Jurrasic). Jackal59 (talk) 17:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)