This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Deleted the link ** Proklos' summary of the Epic Cycle translated by Gregory Nagy
Could not retrieve it from internet archives
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. - GTBacchus( talk) 08:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
I don't want to seem irritating, but shouldn't this have been discussed first with User:Petrouchka, the author of the article and of several other articles on the lesser works of the Trojan Cycle? It would be a pity if such a good editor took offence for such a small question.-- Aldux 23:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
The change in the assessment of Cypria, exhibited in Aristotle and then influenced by Aristotle's example, was a Hellenistic downgrading. I can't enter this in the article because it will be challenged as "original research" and I have no standard history of Greek literature here. Anyone interested in this point? The present passive of non-attribution makes no distinctions and contains little information. -- Wetman 19:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
The newly expanded article reads very well to me. I just want to raise one minor problem: the detail in footnote 1 actually doesn't support any dating of the fixed text of Cypria as known in classical times -- because (as the article goes on to say, and as I would agree) the main stories were in all likelihood fixed (part of a Faktkanon maybe) earlier than the text. Thus the Judgement of Paris could quite well have been painted before the text as known in classical times was fixed. And rew D alby 16:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Note 1 is used to support the statement of the date the composition of Cypria is placed at. The link in this note is now broken. As it is a fairly important point, and also considering the fact that this note is repeated as a reference in the Literature section of Cyprus, could someone please update the link with a working one or replace the note with a proper literature citation? AstarothCY ( talk) 10:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I added the following caveat: "What follows embeds reports of known content of the Cypria in a retelling of the known events leading up to the anger of Achilles.".
A better approach would be to report the episodes that are actually known to have been in the Cypria. The fully-detailed lead-up to the Trojan War is reported elsewhere.-- Wetman ( talk) 17:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Deleted the link ** Proklos' summary of the Epic Cycle translated by Gregory Nagy
Could not retrieve it from internet archives
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. - GTBacchus( talk) 08:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
I don't want to seem irritating, but shouldn't this have been discussed first with User:Petrouchka, the author of the article and of several other articles on the lesser works of the Trojan Cycle? It would be a pity if such a good editor took offence for such a small question.-- Aldux 23:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
The change in the assessment of Cypria, exhibited in Aristotle and then influenced by Aristotle's example, was a Hellenistic downgrading. I can't enter this in the article because it will be challenged as "original research" and I have no standard history of Greek literature here. Anyone interested in this point? The present passive of non-attribution makes no distinctions and contains little information. -- Wetman 19:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
The newly expanded article reads very well to me. I just want to raise one minor problem: the detail in footnote 1 actually doesn't support any dating of the fixed text of Cypria as known in classical times -- because (as the article goes on to say, and as I would agree) the main stories were in all likelihood fixed (part of a Faktkanon maybe) earlier than the text. Thus the Judgement of Paris could quite well have been painted before the text as known in classical times was fixed. And rew D alby 16:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Note 1 is used to support the statement of the date the composition of Cypria is placed at. The link in this note is now broken. As it is a fairly important point, and also considering the fact that this note is repeated as a reference in the Literature section of Cyprus, could someone please update the link with a working one or replace the note with a proper literature citation? AstarothCY ( talk) 10:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I added the following caveat: "What follows embeds reports of known content of the Cypria in a retelling of the known events leading up to the anger of Achilles.".
A better approach would be to report the episodes that are actually known to have been in the Cypria. The fully-detailed lead-up to the Trojan War is reported elsewhere.-- Wetman ( talk) 17:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)