Talk:Charles Anthon

a little gem

Articles like this are the little gems in the WP crown. Never heard of this guy before, just followed the links, and I have now squirreled away his edition of the Anabasis for my own use. I don't suppose his Anabasis is up to date but it has charm and it costs nothing. What other encyclopaedia offers all that? Thanks to all who contributed. McZeus (talk) 23:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC) I was going to download his edition of Juvenal and Persius too. It's a school edition and the naughty bits have been cut out but I wanted some commentary on Persius. Unfortunately, while there is a lengthy commentary on Juvenal, there is none on Persius. I call that false advertising and very peculiar. I've scanned the PDF version several times and can't find it. McZeus (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words; it's good to know that putting all those links in there was something more than merely compulsive - a useful expression of the procrastinatory need. It is odd that the Latin text of Persius (pp. 89-111) receives no commentary; do note the remark in the dedication (p. iv), though, which playfully suggests the merits of this approach:

With regard to Persius, you may remember that I intended to edit his Satires along with those of Juvenal until you dissuaded me from the attempt. I have therefore contented myself with merely giving the Latin text, unaccompanied by a single word of comment. This part of the volume, I am very sure, will meet with the undivided approbation of those critical friends of mine, who have uniformly condemned my commentaries as exuberant, if not useless, and over whose fairness and acumen you and I have had many a pleasant chat.

For a Persius commentary, give yourself a quick tour of Drummond 1799, Stocker 1839, Macleane 1867, Pretor 1868, Conington 1872 (based on lectures of 1855; here 3rd ed. of 1893), Hart 1875, Gildersleeve 1875 and I know you will find something agreeable. Wareh (talk) 00:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the extra links - very useful! And for carving the Anthon text into such neat portions. I should have spotted the comment in the dedication myself but I tend to consume text like a blind man, feelingly, rather than incisively, the way a scholar should. So it's right for me to leave articles like this to guys like you. McZeus (talk) 01:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Latter Day Saint position on Professor Anthon

I have always been taught and believe it to have been the traditional Latter Day Saint position that Professor Anthon is specifically the very person referred to by the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 29:11. The Latter Day Saint position is that Anthon is the "one who is learned" and Joseph Smith Jr. is the "one who is not learned," and that the "book that is sealed" is none other than the Book of Mormon and that this is the meaning of the prophecy in Isaiah chapter 29 which has now been fulfilled. Surely if sources can be found for this in Latter Day Saint books, the fact that this interpretation of Isaiah has been written about would be notable and thus worthy of inclusion? I mean it's not just anybody who has an entire religion claiming that they are referred to personally in Biblical prophecy.

It should be noted that this view does not depend on the dubious authenticity of the paper which has been called the "Anthon transcript," which could very easily be a forgery and not the original paper presented to Anthon. --BenMcLean (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The grand gesture with which Anthon sweeps away a Persius commentary reveals something of the biblical prophet in his character, I think. There can be no prophets without mystification. But yes, if there are sources and you can cite them, why not develop the article a bit further along those lines? He was obviously an interesting character. McZeus (talk) 22:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I have also been taught that many times when I was a Mormon. I am sure there are sources that would support its inclusion. Too lazy to look them up myself right now.--Descartes1979 (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Image

Hi, the following image from the library of congress was recently removed: file:Charles Anthon - Brady-Handy edit.jpg, by someone stating this is not him. I would like to bring this to the attention of other editors. Is the library of Congress wrong? If yes, this also needs to be changed on Commons, on Wikidata and our sister Wikipedias. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 07:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I just read about this and was surprised to see that Wikipedia had already been edited accordingly. This is the only source I know of that makes this argument. (link) The author is Brent Metcalfe, who has been known in Mormon Studies circles for some years. I think he makes a persuasive case that this photograph was misidentified in the LOC catalog, and it is actually of his brother Henry (several examples for comparison included in the link).

Metcalfe's essay was published April 29, which is surprising because the WP edit had already happened by then, on March 5, and it had the same rationale in the edit comment. So perhaps this finding was known before Metcalfe.

And since then, Metcalfe updated his essay in May to report that he had notified the Library of Congress of the error and they replied appreciatively, then a while later they changed their catalog description to "Rev. Henry Anthon" (link). We should probably use one of the other LOC images of Charles Anthon (link). ——Rich jj (talk) 15:59, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

One more thing, the original pre-edited image on Commons (file:Charles Anthon - Brady-Handy.jpg) gives the LOC URL where it came from, and that link now says that this is Henry Anthon. And apparently the Joseph Smith Papers team has accepted Metcalfe's finding: https://www.facebook.com/JosephSmithPapers/posts/10153221812492973

I think these things need to be done:

1. Upload an image of the actual Charles Anthon from the LOC
2. In the affected articles, replace the old image with the new one (or keep Henry's picture and fix the caption, if applicable):
   • Anthon Transcript
   • Charles Anthon (already removed)
   • de:Liste klassischer Philologen
   • de:Charles Anthon
   • fr:Photographie/Personnalités/B/Mathew Brady
   • he:צ'ארלס אנתון
   • ko:찰스 안톤
   • pt:Charles Anthon
3. For the old images, change the name, description, and wikidata to be Henry Anthon:
   • file:Charles Anthon - Brady-Handy edit.jpg
   • file:Charles Anthon - Brady-Handy.jpg

I don't know who's going to do these things, and I haven't put any notices on these affected pages listed above. ——Rich jj (talk) 16:26, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Removed image (yet again) which is of Rev. Dr. Henry Anthon, Rector of St. Mark's in New York (compare image to the frontispiece in Tributes to the Memory of Rev. Henry Anthon, 1862). I need to find an actual image of Rev. Charles Anthon as these mislabeled images are annoying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OBlevins (talk • contribs) 02:58, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

An actual image of Charles Anthon can be found here: https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE4333021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by OBlevins (talk • contribs) 03:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

The mysterious "chair of professor Morse"

Article currently says (quoting Encyclopedia Britannica IX) that In 1835, he succeeded to the chair of Professor Morse. It isn't clear who this Morse is, but in trying to hunt him down, I notice that NYU's Grey Art Gallery says that Samuel Morse of morse code fame was a professor of painting and sculpture at New York University. Unfortunately, this doesn't match Anthon's subjects, and Morse apparently stayed as a professor there until long after 1835 (teaching until 1841; listed as a professor until 1872). Nonetheless – could this be the Morse being referred to? The Britannica doesn't have an entry for any other Morse (though nor does it mention Samuel's professorship)... Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:06, 4 December 2019 (UTC)