User talk:Ifly6/First Catilinarian conspiracy
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Avilich in topic Request for comments
Request for comments
edit@T8612 and Avilich: Continuing from the short conversation a few days back on my talk page on the Catilinarian conspiracy, I am of a few opinions:
- The current page on the "First" "Catilinarian" "conspiracy" (FCC) needs a rewrite, which I've done here.
- Merging the FCC into the real Catilinarian conspiracy is probably not the best course of action:
- The "Second" Catilinarian conspiracy existed, unlike the FCC. I think we should probably keep fiction and fact separate.
- The two titles, while not accurate, do serve the purpose of meaningful disambiguation. They also draw on separated modern sources.
- Doing a move would probably be contested by the primary source fetishists and I'm not willing to lead those stupid battles.
I'd appreciate comments both on the other matters and on improving this draft. I've done a look about the sources I have on hand and the things that they cite directly, but any further sources would be helpful, especially if there is anything on the modern historiography of the "conspiracy". Ifly6 (talk) 18:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I still think that having two pages, one titled the "Catilinarian conspiracy" and another (the false one) titled the "first Catilinarian conspiracy", much like Peloponnesian War and First Peloponnesian War, is the best course of action. I can try to do a stealth move to avoid discussion altogether, if none of you object. Avilich (talk) 21:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think those names are probably the "best" or "correct" names for the articles. Eg Gruen LGGR (1995)'s index has the "Second" Catilinarian conspiracy s.v. "Catilinarian conspiracy" with no ordinal distinction. Ifly6 (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Done Avilich (talk) 00:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- As for source recommendations, this one will probably serve you well, if you can get your hands on it: D.H. Berry, Cicero's Catilinarians, Oxford UP (2020). I haven't read it but the abstract claims it has 'a full and up-to-date account of the Catilinarian conspiracy'. Avilich (talk) 00:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- It's funny you mention it because I was just looking for it in the library earlier today. Ifly6 (talk) 00:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- I just noticed, you can download it for free on Library Genesis. Avilich (talk) 00:24, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- It's funny you mention it because I was just looking for it in the library earlier today. Ifly6 (talk) 00:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think those names are probably the "best" or "correct" names for the articles. Eg Gruen LGGR (1995)'s index has the "Second" Catilinarian conspiracy s.v. "Catilinarian conspiracy" with no ordinal distinction. Ifly6 (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)