![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sallust and Sallustius are just variant spellings. We should come up with a better way of keeping the people of this name separate: Sallust and Sallustius should both redirect to a disambiguation page. This page should move to Sallustius the Philosopher (a very bad title, since our Sallustius was exactly not a professional philosopher; he was, rather, a statesman of pious inclinations – still, it's under the name Sallustius the Philosopher that De diis et mundo circulated). And Sallustius the historian should move to ... somewhere else.
Alternatively,
Sallust and
Sallustius could both direct to the historian, from whom there could be a link to
Sallustius (disambiguation), from which there could be a link to
Sallustius the Philosopher.
Quartier
Latin1968
00:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Sallustius. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Nothing is really known about this Sallustius aside from his authorship of On the Gods and the Cosmos and his near-certain identity with Salutius (not Flavius Sallustius, as the article suggests). It makes more sense that the article should be repurposed and moved to that title instead, or alternatively merged. I myself lean towards merging. Avilich ( talk) 14:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Concerning the uncertainty of the identification, I think these sources tip the scales in Secundus's favor. Robert Étienne (1963) argued that the Neoplatonist should be identified with Flavius, not with Secundus, and this was cautiously accepted by the PLRE in 1971. The source you already cited, Bowersock's Julian (1978), in appendix 3, rebutted Étienne's argument, concluding that the content of the treatise "makes Salutius by far the more plausible candidate", and his argument seems to have been accepted by most or all who came after him. Athanassiadi (p. 154) takes for granted that the Neoplatonist Sallustius = Secundus Salutius, as does for example Barnes, Ammianus Marcellinus and the Representation of Historical Reality (Cornell UP, 1998), p. 62. The other sources in the revision link also follow the same line of thinking.
In short, my position is: if it's decided that "Σαλούστιος" should not be merged with Salutius (as I think should be done), then his article should be moved to On the Gods and the Cosmos, because, absent any identification, the author is just an obscure and non-notable personality. Avilich ( talk) 17:59, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
I'll leave this here for a few days, and if no one objects, I'll probably do a merge with Salutius. Avilich ( talk) 21:11, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sallust and Sallustius are just variant spellings. We should come up with a better way of keeping the people of this name separate: Sallust and Sallustius should both redirect to a disambiguation page. This page should move to Sallustius the Philosopher (a very bad title, since our Sallustius was exactly not a professional philosopher; he was, rather, a statesman of pious inclinations – still, it's under the name Sallustius the Philosopher that De diis et mundo circulated). And Sallustius the historian should move to ... somewhere else.
Alternatively,
Sallust and
Sallustius could both direct to the historian, from whom there could be a link to
Sallustius (disambiguation), from which there could be a link to
Sallustius the Philosopher.
Quartier
Latin1968
00:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Sallustius. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Nothing is really known about this Sallustius aside from his authorship of On the Gods and the Cosmos and his near-certain identity with Salutius (not Flavius Sallustius, as the article suggests). It makes more sense that the article should be repurposed and moved to that title instead, or alternatively merged. I myself lean towards merging. Avilich ( talk) 14:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Concerning the uncertainty of the identification, I think these sources tip the scales in Secundus's favor. Robert Étienne (1963) argued that the Neoplatonist should be identified with Flavius, not with Secundus, and this was cautiously accepted by the PLRE in 1971. The source you already cited, Bowersock's Julian (1978), in appendix 3, rebutted Étienne's argument, concluding that the content of the treatise "makes Salutius by far the more plausible candidate", and his argument seems to have been accepted by most or all who came after him. Athanassiadi (p. 154) takes for granted that the Neoplatonist Sallustius = Secundus Salutius, as does for example Barnes, Ammianus Marcellinus and the Representation of Historical Reality (Cornell UP, 1998), p. 62. The other sources in the revision link also follow the same line of thinking.
In short, my position is: if it's decided that "Σαλούστιος" should not be merged with Salutius (as I think should be done), then his article should be moved to On the Gods and the Cosmos, because, absent any identification, the author is just an obscure and non-notable personality. Avilich ( talk) 17:59, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
I'll leave this here for a few days, and if no one objects, I'll probably do a merge with Salutius. Avilich ( talk) 21:11, 18 June 2021 (UTC)