Talk:Peisistratus (disambiguation)

Spelling

The standard spelling of this name almost always encountered in English is Peisistratus, not Pisistratus.

It's very confusing for Wikipedia to use the rare variant as the main form for the article.

I have added a section at the top indicating the Ancient Greek, standard English, and alternate English spellings.

Otherwise I have left the article as-is though, so as to not get in a tug-of-war with whomever did the edit to Pisistratus. (That edit noted as correcting a "typo" I believe.)

But someone more involved in Wikipedia than I might want to look into this (consult that lesser work, the Encyclopaedia Britannica for example), and:

- change everything back to Peisistratus in the text, 

- eliminate all the confusing multiple alternate spellings given in the running text, 

- switch it around so the article text appears at the entry "Peisistratus", and the entry for "Pisistratus" forwards to "Peisistratus" (the opposite of the present situation).

For your reference, the Greek word would be directly transliterated as PEISISTRATOS.

When the ancient Romans transliterated this into Latin, they did two things: applied a Latin grammatical ending as they always did, and rendered the EI as I, because that was how the Greek EI had come to be pronounced at that late, post-Classical-Greek period. Thus PISISTRATUS.

Greek words adopted into English traditionally got adopted in their Latinized form, so PISISTRATUS would have been the expected English spelling.

However, it appears that in this case English writers corrected the Latins as to the EI digraph, and we have gotten the mixed form PEISISTRATUS -- using the original Greek EI, and the Latin ending US -- as our standard form.

If a purist doesn't like this mixed form, the answer is not to go back to the Latin PISISTRATUS -- but rather to use the contemporary academic form, the direct transliteration PEISISTRATOS -- with of course a notation of the standard and alternate English versions.

Not that this is an entirely scientific test, but a google search turns up over three times as many pages for "Pisistratus" than "Peisistratus". That probably means Pisistratus is the more popular spelling. You stated "The standard spelling of this name almost always encountered in English is Peisistratus, not Pisistratus." I've admittedly only read a handful of sources that bring up the name, but it has always been spelled Pisistratus. - Ravenous 21:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that Peisistratus is the 'standard' spelling. The traditional English spelling is Pisistratus, which, like all traditional spellings of Greek names, derivies from the Latinized version, as you point out. If "standard" means "traditional" then Peisistratus is not the standard spelling. I doubt whether "Peisistratus" is even more common than "Pisistratus", although of course it depends where you look. The Oxford Classical Dictionary agrees with Google on this one, and prints "Pisistratus"70.107.165.191 03:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Good point.

I enjoyed this: though some pronounce it differently so that, for example, "Pisistratus' fear" sounds just like "pissy stratosphere" but removed it because I didn't think it quite Wikifiable. Andrew Dalby 08:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Not wikifiable! Well, I suppose you're right.

I agree with those who support "Pisistratus" as the name for the article, for two reasons: first, on grounds of "purism"; second, because many reference works use that spelling (Oxford Classical Dict, American Heritage Dict, Columbia Enc., OED, but notably not Britannica), which also has more Google hits. The first is not really a valid reason to move an article, but the second seems to point towards a move. Lesgles (talk) 17:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Sources

Aside from Herodotus, what are the sources for this article? -Ravenous 22:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm posting a short, annotated bibliography on sources that I've encountered and am using as a basis for the information I'm presenting here: Borthwick, Edward K. “Music and Dance.” Civilization of the Ancient Mediterranean World: Greece and Rome. Eds. Grant, Michael and Kitzinger, Rachel. 3 vols. New York: Scribner’s, 1988. Vol. 1, 1507-8. Annotations: short excerpt in this article on Pisistratus, mainly on his involvement in new Greek festivals and theatric arts.

Cahill, Thomas. Sailing the Wine Dark Sea: Why the Greeks Matter. New York: Doubleday, 2003. Annotation: Contains more general data on my subject than other sources. Most helpful facts are about post Pisistratus era effects. Small section on Pisistratus himself, but has evidence of his effect on the city.

French, A. “The Party of Peisistratos.” Greece & Rome. Vol. 6, No. 1, March 1959. 45-57 Annotation: Examines what changes happened between Solon and Peisistratos that allowed Pisistratus to become a tyrant in Athens. Is mainly concerned with examining the actual distinctions between the parties in Pisistratus' era. It stresses the importance of the economic differences, as well as territorial, in differentiating between the three parties.

Garland, Robert. “Greek Spectacles and Festivals.” Civilization of the Ancient Mediterranean World: Greece and Rome. Eds. Grant, Michael and Kitzinger, Rachel. 3 vols. New York: Scribner’s, 1988. Vol. 1, 1148. Annotations: Short excerpt with information on the arts and theatre during Pisistratus' time. May want to read further in chapter later, discuses different festivals that could have impact on his popularity.

Hornblower, Simon and Spawforth, Anthony eds. “Peisistratus.” The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, 2003. Annotations: Pg 1186 Short but detailed facts on rise to power, interest in arts in Athens, political dealings (good and bad) and involvement in city’s progress in the middle 6th century BCE

Lavelle, B. M. Fame, Money and Power: The Rise of Peisistratos and “Democratic” Tyranny at Athens. The University of Michigan Press, 2005. Annotations: this is a very extensive work detailing the rise of Pisistratus. I have not yet read the entire work, and so far the material focuses primarily on the pre-Pisistrian era and examines many of the reasons politically and economically for why Pisistratus was so successful. This volume seems so complete that I will have to be careful not to obtain too much of my information from it to be sure that my report is not biased toward Lavelle’s commentary.

Lavelle B. M. “The Compleat Angler: Observations on the Rise of Peisistratos in Herodotos (1.59-64). The Classical Quarterly. New Series, Vol. 41, No. 2, 1991. 317-324. Annotations: I’m not finished with this work yet. It is, so far, and as the title suggests, involved with examining the Pisistratid period according to Herodotus. I assume that Lavelle used some of this information again in his later monograph on the rise of Pisistratus, but I am not yet sure. It is clear, however, that Lavelle is one of the leading scholars on Pisistratus and his life and politics.

Thucydides. “Funeral Oration of Pericles.” The Peloponnesian War. Trans. Benjamin Jowett, 1881. Ed. Paul Brians. December 18, 1998. <http://katie.luther.edu/moodle/mod/resource/view.php?id=68564> Annotations: Indicative of the high opinion Pericles/Thucydides had of their Athens. Boasts glories of the Athenian way. Useful as more of a public meter of opinion and measurement of reform effects than a solid reference for the workings of Athenian society and government at the time. --The Krazy Karl (talk) 16:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

A split

This was becoming unmanageable and needed to be carved up. There are other people named Peisistratus who bear inclusion here, check out this page for some others.

I think that the various projects need to direct their pages, but I am not a member of those projects and leave that judgment to them. Carlossuarez46 20:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)