Talk:Cato the Elder/Archive 1

Archive 1

Adding Headline Breaks

If anyone can think of better titles, feel free. -- Agne27 00:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Several points of view

Cato the Elder was cool! -- 69.149.75.226 20:47, 29 October 2005

Well, he did certainly give us a great quote to work off of for destroying enemies... Darkmusashi 00:20, 17 December 2005

he was dumb....

he stabbed himself! -- 24.16.152.47 00:59, 30 June 2006

You must be thinking of Cato the Younger rather than Cato the Elder --Pichote 19:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Cato's extended biography

The newly added material seems to come out of some mid-19th century source. It ought to be credited, I think. Andrew Dalby 19:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC) I see now. It's all out of Smith, so it is credited. Andrew Dalby 19:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is. -- Pichote 19:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Andrew! With respect to the 19th century material included in Cato the Elder, feel free to update any outdated language you could find (or directly, revert my edits). It would be superb to adapt the content of Smith's book into the article, but 1) Cato Major is a renowned celebrity, so he deserves a good article; 2) I lack the time for adding content to the article at a very fast rate. Again, whenever you feel the article a little (or clearly) imbalanced, revert my edits. It is always great to meet somebody interested in Cato. --Pichote 19:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, Pichote. No, I don't want to revert it. It's good material, though the 19th century English took me aback at first! I'm sure Cato would have approved of some good old-fashioned language, especially in his praise. Getting it all in there, with the references too, was an excellent step. Andrew Dalby 19:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

19th century material included in Cato the Elder

I plan to add content based on (William Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, 1870) the text of which is in the public domain. This will be a slow process because I will try to adapt the 19th century vocabulary and grammar to 21st century language and purge some point of view issues... to the best of my knowledge. As said above: whenever you feel the article a little (or clearly) imbalanced, make your corrections, o directly: revert my edits. -- Pichote 23:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, go right ahead! With Smith's help and yours, Pichote, the Cato article is launched towards star quality. Andrew Dalby 08:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Star quality? Well... I would like to somewhat improve the quality of the article, but let matters take their course, ha ha. -- Pichote 12:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I completed the Youth section and its subsections. Next target: expand the Early Career section. Again, any comment will be kindly welcomed! -- Pichote 20:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to say: "Feel free to correct/add/clarify my edits." --Pichote 20:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I added content covering the whole military career of Cato the Elder (early career, consulship, and late career). I have tried to adapt the 19th century expresiveness of Smith1870's authors to the more balanced and neutral tone of our 21st century Wikipedia. Note: perhaps you will find a lack of wikilinks, feel free to add them. Next target: further expand the Section Influence in Rome (or as I say: Cato the citizen). Happy editing! -- Pichote 18:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Portrait

As far as I know, the portrait included on the page has in no way been identified as Cato the Elder. Every book that I have seen it in just identifies it as an old man of Patrician status. There fore, I think it should be removed. -- carriensol

If you follow the interwiki links you find that it has been copied to the Cato page almost worldwide. But I think you're right. It ought to go. Andrew Dalby 16:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's been long enough and so I'm going to remove it. Hopefully someone will check here before they decide to add it back in. -- carriensol

"Every book that I have seen it in just identifies it as an old man of Patrician status" I agree: we have enough evidence to remove the image. -- Pichote 15:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Rewording

I was really imprseed by the length and depth of this article but some of it seemed to use quite archaic language. Would anyone mind if I reworded it a little? Please flag up if I change the meaning of something by accident.

John

CaptinJohn (talk) 13:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Pictures?

What is the relevance of the bust of Scipio and the image of the Arch of Septimius Severus? Cato isn't Scipio, and Cato died several hundred years before that Arch was constructed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.158.35 (talk) 03:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Cannot understand a sentence

"He was also one of the very few early Latin authors who could claim Latin as a native language." What was the native language of Romans, if not Latin?--Gspinoza 13:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Many Latin authors were not native born Romans, but were born in other parts of Italy which did not speak Latin, or came from the various non-Latin speaking provinces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.158.35 (talk) 03:40, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Article title not in lead

Cato the Elder should be mentioned in bold at the beginning of the article if that is how he is most commonly referred to. Jack (talk) 18:07, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. However, if he is not commonly referred to as Cato the Elder, then that should not be the title of this article. In that case, Cato (elder) would be better so that the title does not wrongly convey that he is commonly referred to as Cato the Elder.

Huh, at google scholar I do get over 2,000 hits for "Cato the Elder" (example), so it does seem to be a common reference for him. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Surname?

the opening sentence has this in it "..was a Roman statesman, commonly surnamed..." correct me if I'm wrong but shouldn't that be the word cognomen not surname? Even if it was the equivalent in roman naming convention, those would not be family names they would be cognomen I think. Smitty1337 (talk) 11:42, 3 October 2011 (UTC) Later in the article it even says this "title of Sapiens, by which he was so well known in his old age, that Cicero says, it became his virtual cognomen". Distinguishing titles like sapiens and priscus wouldn't, to my knowledge, be hereditary. And certainly not age clarifying elder or younger, which simply disambiguate generations, such as woman naming conventions in Rome. Smitty1337 (talk) 01:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Cato is the cognomen, The Elder or Censorius seem to be agnomens from what I understand. Maybe we should use though an English equivalent, possible a different formulation that doesn't call for that much precision, something like "he was also commonly called..." man with one red shoe 20:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Good point, those would be Agnomen since they are not hereditary. My main purpose is to get rid of the word surname, which implies family name and heridtary, which these are neither. I like your proposed phrasing, it allows compensation for the difficulty of english naming convention lacking an equivilent. I'll make the adjustmentSmitty1337 (talk) 07:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

"Surname" in its strict sense means a family name, but it can also be used in a loose sense to indicate an acquired name like an agnomen. So "surnamed" wasn't incorrect to begin with. It might have been a bit unclear, though, since this usage isn't seen much anymore. 70.107.238.239 (talk) 20:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Goes at the guy's Wiktionary entry, not here, unless we're doing the American and British and Latin pronunciations, which we shouldn't. — LlywelynII 01:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cato the Elder. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110216165027/http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=Liv5His.sgm&images=images%2Fmodeng&data=%2Ftexts%2Fenglish%2Fmodeng%2Fparsed&tag=public&part=367&division=div2 to http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=Liv5His.sgm&images=images%2Fmodeng&data=%2Ftexts%2Fenglish%2Fmodeng%2Fparsed&tag=public&part=367&division=div2

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) 22:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Political Party

Political party is shown as Optimates, but the article on Optimates shows it appearing on the political scene as early as 133 BC ... i.e., long after the death of Marcus Porcius Cato (Cato the Elder). Perhaps there was confusion with Cato the Younger? Or is the article on Optimates wrong about when it originated? Taquito1 (talk) 16:08, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it's an anachronism. I removed it. T8612 (talk) 16:49, 5 January 2020 (UTC)