This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
It would be useful to have separate pages for Philostratus I-IV (or at any rate II and III), since then each could be given Persondata. This page could be a disambiguation page, but extended to note the lacunae in our knowledge, difficulties of attribution etc. What do ppl think? Dsp1311:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
I agree, a split is required. I've linked to the page for Philostratus (Philostratus II in the article). Two of the authors I've used on Imperial cult (ancient Rome) cite him simply as Philostratus. A quick google-search suggests to me that Philostratus II in the current article is more usually known as Philostratus, and that this should be the default. Perhaps a disambiguation page would help. Haploidavey (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Made the split. I left Philostratus II as the default Philostratus article, and then created pages Philostratus (disambiguation), Philostratus III, and Philostratus IV. Since I know absolutely nothing on the topic, I simply moved the existing text and reworked them into passable stub/start articles.
One thing to note is that the section "Ambiguities in attribution" was lost in the move, since I couldn't figure out where to put it and really didn't want to copy-paste the same thing into each article. I include it here:
There is great difficulty, due to a confused statement of the Suda in disentangling the works and even the personalities of these Philostrati. Reference is there made to Philostratus as the son of Verus, a rhetorician in Nero's time, who wrote tragedies, comedies and treatises. The Suda thus appears to give to Philostratus the Athenian a life of 200 years! We must be content to assume two Lemnian Philostrati, both sophists, living in Rome.
