This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Constantine the Great article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | Constantine the Great has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 3, 2004, July 25, 2004, July 3, 2005, July 25, 2005, July 25, 2006, July 25, 2007, July 25, 2008, July 25, 2009, July 25, 2010, July 25, 2013, July 25, 2016, July 25, 2018, July 25, 2021, and July 25, 2022. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Copy/paste from my talk page:
What are the sources of Constantius Chlorus, Constantin the Great and all the Roman Emperors considered of “Illyrian origin” that they are of illyrian origin? Daco-Romans Latins of East ( talk) 17:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Not recognizing Odahl and Murray as WP:RS is a WP:CIR issue. tgeorgescu ( talk) 18:58, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
You keep avoiding my question. What are the sources of Constantine the Great being of illyrian origin? He was Daco-Roman Daco-Romans Latins of East ( talk) 18:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
If you want to change long-standing Illyrian to Dacian, the WP:BURDEN is upon you, not upon the person who reverts your change as original research. Apart from vagaries, you have shown no WP:RS for your claim.
We WP:CITE mainstream historians, not depictions upon marble columns. tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Note: they got indeffed. tgeorgescu ( talk) 20:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Both the third paragraph of the article summary and the "religious policy" section under "later rule" are, well, a bit of a mess.
Summary paragraph: the use of 'catechumen' is weird and confusing here - it's listed along with paganism as if it were a second non-Christian religion Constantine followed for a time before converting. Tacked onto the same sentence is an undated clause about his eventual baptism, which fails to mention that it was a deathbed conversion (being squeezed between clauses about events from 312 and 313 doesn't help clarify that chronology, either). Seems like this would be a good place in the article to clearly explain the basic sequence of events here: Constantine was openly supportive of Christianity and made clear his intent to eventually be baptized, but that baptism didn't occur until the 330s when he was on his deathbed.
Later rule subsection: ...oof. I'm gonna go with bullet points so I don't spend an hour nitpicking a few paragraphs of text I am probably not qualified to rewrite:
Solistus ( talk) 22:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The lead contains the following sentence about Helena: "She was a saint and is attributed with the conversion of her son". What is "she was a saint" supposed to mean? Surely it should be something like "she is considered a saint by ..." or "she was canonized by ...". Aterbiou ( talk) 13:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
In the "In the West" section there is a bit of an inconsistency as to whether the title A/augustus should be capitalised. The text says " support for raising Constantine to the rank of full augustus" and later "proclaimed Constantine as augustus" as well as one further useage. However the caption of the image next to this text says of the statue in York it is "near the spot where he was proclaimed Augustus in 306". Thus should these be standardised to either Augustus or augustus? Dunarc ( talk) 22:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm no late antiquity scholar, but I'm curious if Peter Heather's interpretation of Constantine expressed in his recent Christendom: The Triumph of a Religion, AD 300–1300 would be due a mention in the article. Essentially, Heather sees it most likely that Constantine had always been a Christian (or at least had been well before 312) and what we see in the timeline of events is his "coming out" as a Christian in stages as it became politically safe for him to do so in an overwhelmingly pagan empire. Personally, I find this significantly more compelling than the notion that he simply wasn't bright enough to realize he couldn't be both at once for nearly a decade—but I don't know how well-trodden this interpretation is, or how fringe it seems. Heather points to the later narrative of Julian converting the other way and practising in secret for an extended period to illustrate why this is plausible. Remsense 诉 09:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Constantine the Great article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | Constantine the Great has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 3, 2004, July 25, 2004, July 3, 2005, July 25, 2005, July 25, 2006, July 25, 2007, July 25, 2008, July 25, 2009, July 25, 2010, July 25, 2013, July 25, 2016, July 25, 2018, July 25, 2021, and July 25, 2022. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Copy/paste from my talk page:
What are the sources of Constantius Chlorus, Constantin the Great and all the Roman Emperors considered of “Illyrian origin” that they are of illyrian origin? Daco-Romans Latins of East ( talk) 17:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Not recognizing Odahl and Murray as WP:RS is a WP:CIR issue. tgeorgescu ( talk) 18:58, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
You keep avoiding my question. What are the sources of Constantine the Great being of illyrian origin? He was Daco-Roman Daco-Romans Latins of East ( talk) 18:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
If you want to change long-standing Illyrian to Dacian, the WP:BURDEN is upon you, not upon the person who reverts your change as original research. Apart from vagaries, you have shown no WP:RS for your claim.
We WP:CITE mainstream historians, not depictions upon marble columns. tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Note: they got indeffed. tgeorgescu ( talk) 20:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Both the third paragraph of the article summary and the "religious policy" section under "later rule" are, well, a bit of a mess.
Summary paragraph: the use of 'catechumen' is weird and confusing here - it's listed along with paganism as if it were a second non-Christian religion Constantine followed for a time before converting. Tacked onto the same sentence is an undated clause about his eventual baptism, which fails to mention that it was a deathbed conversion (being squeezed between clauses about events from 312 and 313 doesn't help clarify that chronology, either). Seems like this would be a good place in the article to clearly explain the basic sequence of events here: Constantine was openly supportive of Christianity and made clear his intent to eventually be baptized, but that baptism didn't occur until the 330s when he was on his deathbed.
Later rule subsection: ...oof. I'm gonna go with bullet points so I don't spend an hour nitpicking a few paragraphs of text I am probably not qualified to rewrite:
Solistus ( talk) 22:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The lead contains the following sentence about Helena: "She was a saint and is attributed with the conversion of her son". What is "she was a saint" supposed to mean? Surely it should be something like "she is considered a saint by ..." or "she was canonized by ...". Aterbiou ( talk) 13:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
In the "In the West" section there is a bit of an inconsistency as to whether the title A/augustus should be capitalised. The text says " support for raising Constantine to the rank of full augustus" and later "proclaimed Constantine as augustus" as well as one further useage. However the caption of the image next to this text says of the statue in York it is "near the spot where he was proclaimed Augustus in 306". Thus should these be standardised to either Augustus or augustus? Dunarc ( talk) 22:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm no late antiquity scholar, but I'm curious if Peter Heather's interpretation of Constantine expressed in his recent Christendom: The Triumph of a Religion, AD 300–1300 would be due a mention in the article. Essentially, Heather sees it most likely that Constantine had always been a Christian (or at least had been well before 312) and what we see in the timeline of events is his "coming out" as a Christian in stages as it became politically safe for him to do so in an overwhelmingly pagan empire. Personally, I find this significantly more compelling than the notion that he simply wasn't bright enough to realize he couldn't be both at once for nearly a decade—but I don't know how well-trodden this interpretation is, or how fringe it seems. Heather points to the later narrative of Julian converting the other way and practising in secret for an extended period to illustrate why this is plausible. Remsense 诉 09:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)