Talk:Roman salute/Archive 1

Ancient Authenticity?

The questions of the authenticity of the Roman salute's ancient origin are significant. If it is real, then why can't someone provide a single evidence? A painting from 1784 is not proof, and possibly not appropriate or NPOV without historical evidence. Rex Curry's website (rexcurry.net) may be biased and polemic, but it does contain much documented evidence. It is appropriate to link it here, though if a website defending the ancient origin of the salute could be found both should be linked. In the meantime, it can't be considered POV biased to link to it if no one has counterarguments. People could just refuse to make counterarguments, and then hide the arguments from the public with the excuse that there is nothing with which to balance it. That is not the spirit of Wikipedia. Carltonh 18:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

I recall seeing in print a photo of children in a U.S. classroom rendering the Roman salute to Old Glory. Is there one online we could use with this article? -- knoodelhed 05:49, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The sites this page is referring to are both highly polemic, in fact they are pages of the same site. Now that's fine, just that I have a sneaking suspicion the people who made this page were influenced by this site. Maybe some other data could be found? Renke

I've seen the inauguration of a couple of Mexican presidents on TV. They take an oath while holding an arm out in a fashion very similar to the Roman salute. Does anyone know if it's in fact from the same tradition?

Wikipedia lies

There are some regular writers on Wikipedia who knowingly perpetuate many lies, and delete anyone who tells the truth. They are lying liars and the lies they tell include the top media cover ups: They cover up many historic photos the Pledge of Allegiance showing the original straight-arm salute (http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html) and the fact that the Pledge's author was a National Socialist, and that the Pledge's straight arm salute was the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis) (http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html) As part of their cover-up they perpetuate the Roman Salute myth. (http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html) And they lie about the oath of the horatii as an absurd support for a Roman connection (http://rexcurry.net/pledgehoratii.html) They cover up for the swastika and its use as a sick socialist symbol (http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html) They cover up for the socialist trio of atrocities. (http://rexcurry.net/socialists.html) They cover up the fact that socialists helped start WWII with the National Socialist German Workers' Party & the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as allies. (http://rexcurry.net/socialistwar.html) They cover up for and are deniers of the socialist Wholecaust, of which the monstrous Holocaust was part (http://rexcurry.net/mediacoverup.html) They cover up for the National Socialist German Worker's Party and always try to use the hackneyed shorthand "Nazi" (http://rexcurry.net/swastikamedia.html) Liars on Wikipedia repeat the most common lies of the media (http://rexcurry.net/mediapledge.html) and (http://rexcurry.net/socialistmedia.html) And they cover up the newer U.S. Supreme Court case that exposes the socialist history of the Pledge (http://rexcurry.net/pledgewonschik.html)

As an example, most of the "Roman Salute" page on Wikipedia is pure poppycock, especially near the top "The Roman salute is a closed finger, flat-palm-down hand raised at an angle (usually 45 degrees) and was used by the Roman Republic. It was also the historical civilian salute of the United States, from 1787?-1934?, known since 1892 as the Bellamy salute. It was also the historical salute among armies of the Middle East and South America. When the Nazi party of Germany adopted the Roman salute from the Italian fascists." The foregoing is all incorrect and of course without any attribution nor support on the Wikipedia page because there is no support. It is not a Roman salute and never was.

Similar criticisms apply to the Wikipedia pages on Francis Bellamy, Edward Bellamy and the Pledge of Allegiance.

As far as I can tell, the only claims along the lines raised in the above lengthy comment have been made by one "Rex Curry", mostly on rexcurry.net, and are not widely accepted or even known among historians. Unless evidence to the contrary is submitted, I would say that these views ought to be treated similarly to those of physics cranks. --Delirium 19:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

When the Nazi party of Germany adopted the Roman salute from the Italian fascists."Italian fascism was around about a decade before Hitler was even known, Mussolini was using this salute long before Hitler invented Nazism. It has been well documented that Hitler was an avid admirer of Mussolini, and it comes as no suprise that many of Hitler's style of government, military uniforms, and speeches mimicked Mussolini's. Roman Italian (talk) 08:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The author of the first version of the Pledge of Allegiance was a socialist, but he was most definately not a National Socialist. He created the Pledge long before National Socialism. Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were not allies. They agreed not to attack each other for a time, an agreement which Nazi Germany reneged upon. Despite having the word "socialist" in the name, the Nazi party was not a socialist party. Socialists and Communists were among the first victims of the Nazi regime. The Social Democratic Party of Germany was the only party in the Reichstag to vote against Hitler's Enabling Act. The Nazi party banned the Social Democratic Party in 1933. Being a leader in the Social Democratic Party got you a trip to the concentration camps. Other than having the word socialits in the name, there was nothing socialist about the Nazi Party.--RLent (talk) 18:24, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Palm upward or downward?

This article mentions the Bellamy salute, and states that; This gesture required that the right hand be "extended gracefully, palm upward, toward the flag." Bellamy salute however, states; right hand lifted, palm downward, to a line with the forehead and close to it.. I can't make out on the photograph what orientation the children are using. In any case, this is a contradiction. squell 13:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

It's not a contradiction, but it's not fully explained. If you read the full description in the Bellamy salute article you will see that they start with a military salute, with the palm downward, the arm bent, and the hand next to the forehead - as in normal military salutes. The arm is then extended straight out from the forehead and the palm is turned upward. The quotation refers to the latter part of Bellamy's description, which is the point at which the arm is extended. In practice this rather complicated manouver wasn't always done according to the book. Paul B 13:53, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Right. I also noted Pledge of allegiance contains yet another description of saluting the flag. The point is, of course, to be clear about the distinctions/similarities between this salute and the fascist one. squell 14:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

old merge discussion

I think this article should be merged into Hitler salute and the whole thing moved to fascist salute. Jooler 14:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

There is a case for merging the Hitler salute and Roman salute articles, but I don't think there is any reason to move to "fascist salute", it was never an exclusively fascist gesture. Paul B 16:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

No, but it is predominantly known as a fascist gesture, particularly in modern times. The most recent example to hit the headlines is Paolo Di Canio an Italian, not a Nazi. [1] Jooler 17:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

There were many fascist groups that did not use this salute. We can have one unified article, but there's also no reason why we shouldn't also have separate detailed articles on the Italian fascist and Nazi versions, as is the case with many other articles in which sub-sections link to a longer main article on a subject that's related to the central one. But I think the central article should still be called "Roman salute",as this is the standard term for the gesture, one which predates fascist usage. BTW, the most recent example in the uk headlines concerns a driver who has been sacked [2] for using the gesture with Nazi meaning. Paul B 17:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

This salute is also used by some polish nationalistic groups such as [pl:Młodzież Wszechpolska] (see http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grafika:Mlodziez_wszechpolska.jpg) but they insist that this gesture has nothing to do with the fascist or hitler salute. Mieciu K 17:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Blank pages

I recieved a message saying that I should not leave blank pages in articles after editing. I have to say I am confused by this, my edit did not leave a blank page, I simply deleted a paragraph that appeared to be written by Rex Curry that was wholly inappropriate and non-professional. He accused several users by name of covering up for Francis Bellamy's ties to Socialism and his wish to transform America into a totalitarian state. Ive viewed Rex Curry's website and after reading it I seriously must question his mental health if not his sanity.

Relax, it was a misunderstanding, probably because of low-resolution monitor. mikka (t) 22:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit war

It looks like we've got an edit war going on on this article. It's been reverted 3 times so far today and will probably be reverted again later. I edited the article earlier to remove the 2nd paragraph in the introduction. This paragraph is wholely in-appropriate for an encyclopedic article. The author accuses several writers by name of cover-ups and lies and contains too many links to the rexcurry.net website, or link spamming. DarthJesus 22:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It's a recurrent problem. Every so often Rex turns up and attempts to insert references to his "discoveries". Anyone who deletes them is a "wikling" who is part of a vast conspiracy against the truth.Paul B 09:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

removed content

I removed from the article the following content that I created because I was unable to find any sources <quote> Since the strength of the Roman legions lay in their discipline, all Roman legionaries were taught to hold their weapons in their right hand. Since Roman society was highly militarized, some historians presume that the Roman salute originated from a greeting and a symbol meaning "I come in peace holding no weapons".<end quote> Mieciu K 21:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you were right to revert it. I almost did so myself, and most Roman images of the "salute" appear to represent "salutes" in the original sense of the word - that is, salutations, or as we might say, waving. Paul B 22:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Modern use in armies

I was reading the noted exceptions of usage and I found it odd that so few were listed... in Portugal the army uses it in the "Allegiange to the Flag" cerimony that marks the end of the recruit... is this "abnormal" enough to warrant a mention? I'm waiting for some feedback on this since I don't see a reason to mention it if it's a common thing, but if it is a common thing it should be mentioned Several photos exist, an example of what I'm talking about: http://img296.imageshack.us/my.php?image=20050617cfyz5.jpg "Juramento de Bandeira, Academia Militar"

Well that photo has no context, but by all means add relevant material. Paul B 22:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

True, here is the context of the photo http://www.academiamilitar.pt/noticias/detalhes.php?id=77 "Academia Militar; it's the Military Academy site. I'll have to inquire for the usage policy os the photo though... A 1993 video on YouTube show the cerimony (50 secs), perhaps interesting as an external reference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqHfNJ2DcjA "Juramento de Bandeira, Porto 1993"--Bellum sine bello 18:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It freaked me out when I saw Felipe Calderón use it (the Nazi variant) in his inauguration ceremony. Is this traditional in Mexico or is it a political statement?

little mistake

The exact translation of "morituri" is "mortal men" rather than "those who are about to die"; thus to distinguish the emperor from all other mortal men.

"we who are about to die salute you" is the established standard translation of the phrase. [3] [4] I don't think we should be confusing people here - perhaps such technicalities would be appropriate on a page devoted to well-known Latin phrases. Paul B 11:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to discuss this sentence because I thought it was an incorrect information since there is a significant difference between "mortal men" and "those who are about to die". Seeing I am a brand new user of Wikipedia I respect and heed the decision of other people more experienced than me.

Sorry friend, but you've got it wrong. The word's both a deponent verb and a future perfect participle: morior, moriri, moritus sum. You end up in the 4th declension plural with morîtûri, "about to die", similar to audîtûrus ("about to hear"), or largîtûrus ("about to bestow").

Morituri (about to die [plural]) te (you) salutamus (we are saluting). We who are about to die are saluting you.

Plus, the phrase was in common use all through the Republic era as well. Who exactly were they addressing as "immortal" then, hmmm? Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 07:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

"Hollywoodized" gesture?

I found it interesting there wasn't anything in this article about the little "chest-thump" bit that you so often see Roman legions in Hollywood films and TV shows (HBO's Rome being an excellent example). Is that little gesture before the actual arm-raise based in fact? --Micahbrwn 03:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering about this too. its usually like a fist over the heart or something.24.105.236.66 (talk) 00:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I disagree with the proposed merger of this article, Bellamy salute, and Hitler salute. Each article is reasonably complete and, due to cultural issues, I think it's best to keep them separate. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree as well. The bellamy salute is particular to the united states and the pledge of allegiance. While it may have some linkage to the Roman salute, what makes the bellamy salute wp:notable is it's history within the context listed above. I see no value in this proposal. Rather then wasting time discussing this, I suggest we find better citations for the roman salute article. Lets find a wp:rs that says Francis Bellamy got his idea for his salute from the roman salute. This article makes that claim, but it's not cited with any reference.--Work permit (talk) 05:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

By the way, the tags were put on the article by an editor who made no arguement for why they should be merged. It strikes me like a "drive by tagging". I've removed the tags and wait to hear from the editor--Work permit (talk) 06:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

"drive by tagging" -- fair enough. Here goes then:

I thought the rationale would be pretty obvious - we have 3 pages for exactly the same gesture. And there's a lot of duplicated information. The Bellamy salute and Hitler salute could be reduced to sections on the Roman salute page (just because it's oldest). Cultural information that goes beyond a few paragraphs on the use of the salute itself belongs on Sieg Heil and Pledge of Allegiance. Nick (talk) 13:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Let me disagree.
    • For starters, there is NO reputable source cited that even LINKS the history of the bellamy salute to the "roman salute". Lets at least develop that linkage through reliable, third party sources.
    • The bellamy salute article is reasonably cited and referenced. I see NO overlap in citation to reputable sources on the bellamy article vs. this one. You say the salutes "looks the same". I guess it does to me as well. So what? Neither of us are reputable. Lets cite me some reputable sources that links the literal history of the two.
    • This article is in my opinion original research. The ONLY citations in this article are sketchy to say the least. The whole article is written as if the "roman salute" was a study of art history. Reading this article, I question if the "roman salute" even existed. I am more inclined to suggest deleting this article then I am suggesting other articles be merged into it.
    • Please cite some reputable sources that support what I think are some tenuous and at times outrageous claims in this article. Do you see them? Why merge the good with the bad?

I have one obvious solution to your observation on "3 pages for exactly the same gesture". Delete this entire article. It is, at best, unreferenced, original research, and fluff. Alternatively, I suggest we let the three articles stand and collectively fix this article, which is a mess.--Work permit (talk) 01:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

And what "tenuous and at times outrageous claims" are made? Be specific. Paul B (talk) 15:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

By definition, everything I tagged as is "tenuous". Any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. We need references from reputable sources for what I have tagged. Lets just just start with two:

• • Similar gestures were adopted elsewhere in the late-19th century among various mass movements What movements? Who says so? And who makes the historical link to the roman salute?
  • In consequence it was argued that the gesture was Nordic in origin, expressive of the free acclamation of a leader. Who argued? A serious academic? And was it just a passing reference?

Um, no. The fact that you tagged something does not "by definition" make it dubious. It might just mean that you are rather over-keen on tagging. As for the assertion of "outrageous" claims, neither of the two you have singled out are remotely outrageous. This gesture, in various forms, was utterly commonplace in mass movements in the 1900s through to the 1930s. There's much discussion of its adoption and development in Falasca-Zamponi's book Fascist Spectacle, University of California, (2000). I don't understand your qustion "And who makes the historical link to the roman salute?" Do you mean who links these gestures to the Romans? Well that question confuses two separate issues. The fact that the gesture is called the "Roman salute" is just a convention. That's what Falasca-Zamponi calls it and what Martin Winkler called it in his American Philological Association paper. It's also what it was called at the time by English speaking writers before it came to be identified in everyone's mind with the Nazis (see Frederick L. Schuman's article The Political Theory of German Fascism in American Political Science Association Review, 1934, just after the Nazis came to power. He calls it "the Roman salute"). Whether it actually originated with the Romans or not is a wholly separate issue. It is explicitly used with that links in art and then in film. Simon Lee's book David (Phaidon, 1999) discusses the lineage between David's paintings and fascism via Napoleon's neo-Roman spetacles. (pp.262-8). As for the links to Nordicism, these arguments are common in Aryanist thought in the late nineteenth century. They can be traced to Walter Baghot's seminal book Physics and Politics (by "physics" he means biology - physicality). Your question "Who argued? A serious academic?" Is another misunderstanding of what is written. The sentence is not about what an "academic" says, but what Nordicists said at the tme. However, some of these issues are discussed in Tilmann's book The Hitler Salute: the Meaning of a Gesture. Paul B (talk) 10:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

What you just wrote, and how you wrote it, is what this article needs; statements that refer to who is making the statement, and citations to reputable sources. You may think I'm being "over eager", but this is the standard used for a good wikipedia article. The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. That's what I mean "by definition". Now, what you wrote is clear, coherent, and referenced. It's at least a basis of discussion. We could add that Borgese argues that the roman salute had never had been the ordinary salute in the streets of Greece and Rome, that it was the salute of a slave who, upon meeting his master, saluted with the raised right arm, to show that his hand was disarmed. Borgese also claims the salute "had been picked at random from classical museums, from gestures of Græco-Roman orators and rulers, and perhaps also from the medieval romance of Carducci"(G. A. Borgese; The Viking press, 1937 p158-159).

Can you tell me where Baghot refers to the gesture in Physics and Politics'?

You say This gesture, in various forms, was utterly commonplace in mass movements in the 1900s through to the 1930s. There's much discussion of its adoption and development in Falasca-Zamponi's book Fascist Spectacle, University of California, (2000). Can you tell me where Falasca-Zamponi discusses mass movements other then italian fascists? The only discussions I could find was the story of it's adoption by the italian facscist movement. When you say mass movements, do you mean just fascist movements? --Work permit (talk) 16:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Citations/ Original Reserach

This article needs more citations. Quite a number of assertations seem to be wp:or. I've labeled a few needs for citations to start--Work permit (talk) 06:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, lets start with this article mentoned in the discussion back in 2005 Roman salute myth & Nazi salute - made in the USA as shown by the symbologist

"New discoveries show that socialists in the USA originated the Nazi salute, robotic group-chanting to flags, Nazism, flag fetishism, and the modern swastika as "S" symbolism for "Socialism." Recent historical research shows that the term "ancient Roman salute" is often erroneously used in reference to the stiff-armed salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSGWP). "

"Another modern influence for the Roman salute myth is "The Oath of the Horatii" a famous painting by Jacques-Louis David in 1784. It is a very modern myth, circa 2006. The first time that Jacques-Louis David's painting was concocted as an excuse for the Roman salute myth was about a year ago on Wikipedia. It was done by a wikiling writer who was trying to cover-up Dr. Curry's work showing that the gesture originated in the USA's early Pledge Of Allegiance. It is more revisionist history air brushed on wakipedia."

"David's painting inaccurately depicts an event, and it is an event that might not have even happened. There is no evidence that any David painting, nor any painting at all, inspired the original straight-armed salute in the pledge of allegiance to the U.S. flag. Jacques-Louis David never used the term "Roman salute" to describe his painting nor to describe anything. There is no evidence that David even possessed such a concept as "Roman salute," or that the concept even existed at that time. Here are other points about the artist David: The artist did not actually see the event that inspired him; The artist was not even attempting to discover the actual scene nor to paint it as a factual record; The artist has never referred to the scene he fabricated as showing an "ancient Roman salute"; The artist has never referred to the scene he fabricated as showing "salutes" at all; David's painting "The Tennis Court Oath" does not show other people taking an oath or performing a "Roman salute"

Not saying it's reputable. Obviously it's not. But lets at least start the discussion and find real, reputable sources.--Work permit (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course open to interpretation too, but Trajan's Column pre-dates all documented info referenced above by Curry (who is a nutjob):

http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~trajan/buildcartoon.cgi?13b http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~trajan/images/hi/4.70.h.jpg

Unfortunately I don't have books to hands, but there's suggestions in a few of the historical books I worked through that the "Roman" salute has come and gone several times. For instance it re-appeared under Napoleon, then faded, before returning. Quite a few "Empires" have acquired it and used it over the year, but the lack of written sources and images will always reduce the odds of finding citations. David's paintings had a recurring theme of the outstretched arm, they feature in his various paintings of Napoleon also. It's a source of the Salute, but not necessarily intended. The salute continues to be featured in Asterix comic books as performed by the Romans with the "Ave Caeser" caveat, and often mockingly by the Gauls and other nations. I'll see what I can dig around, but the origins are probably truly lost to the legends as much as the English "two finger" V insult.--Koncorde (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated. I'd like to fix this article, but I couldn't find anything reputable. The origin of the V sign, which is as you say lost to legends, is better cited this this article.

"Dr. Rex Curry", who also calls himself "Professor Rex Curry", is an extreme right-wing conspiracy theorist and website owner who self-publishes books and pamphlets through his site. He was banned from Wikipedia years ago for pushing his fringe views and for making numerous accusations against editors (including myself). His theories about the swastika and the salute are without foundation, and are soley designed to pursue his agenda that Nazi symbols are, in some sense, derived from an earlier "socialist" tradition. In fact the Berllamy salute bears almost no resemblance to the Nazi salute. The children are supposed to gently raise up their arms with the palm upwards as if "lifting" the flag. Only the existance of photos of kids with their arms raised makes it seem as though there is some similarity to the rigid straight-arm Nazi gesture. You could just as easily take photos of people hailing cabs as evidence of the origins of the salute. The swastika is derived from the ancient Indian symbol that was, at the time, interpreted as the ethnic badge of the Aryans. This is very well documented. It has nothing whatever to do with the letter S. Paul B (talk) 11:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

There are too many [citation needed]s in this article. For instance, it says something about the salute being used in movies, and then says citation needed. You don't need to cite something like that; what, are you going to get a screen shot, or find a review that mentions the salute?!! Rusty8 (talk) 06:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. If its an important observation, then some reputable source must have linked the romulan salute to the roman salute (the only specific example given to support a general hypothesis). Alternatively, it's just trivia or orginal research. I don't think, a picture would suffice. Alot of people raise a hand, it doesn't make the gesture a roman salute [5]. Having said that, the whole section Uses in fiction feels more like a trivia section so I don't feel so strongly about the need for citations. --Work permit (talk) 07:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't read the article clearly because these are too many ^{[citation needed]}.--Amore Mio (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

That's because this article may contain original research and unverified claims and so needs citations for verification. It's better to read slowly then be misled.--Work permit (talk) 00:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Mexico

I as a mexican anonmouse wanted to note that in Mexico the Roman salute is also used for the pledge of allegiance to the flag, not just for swearing oaths. (I have been told by northamericans that an elementary school's worth of kids saluting the flag in this fashion can be unnerving, but that is neither here nor there.) However oaths are often directed at the flag, so there is some overlap there. 189.172.100.223 (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that note. We'd need to find a source that describes the Mexican use, but if we do then it'd be helpful to add that fact. BTW, it was used by U.S. schoolchildren for their pledge of allegiance too, until the rise of Nazism.   Will Beback  talk  20:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I think we need a source that says this salute is a roman salute. just sticking your hand up does not make it a roman salute.--Work permit (talk) 01:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Fatmah addition

I recently deleted additions that claim Fatmah use "the roman salute". The reference cited was a jpg showing a bunch of people raising their hands. There is NO reference provided that uses the words "roman salute" to explain the gesture. Just sticking your hand up does not make it a roman salute.--Work permit (talk) 07:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced tags

Discuss removal of unreferenced tags here. All tags are on on statements with no citations or references. Absent evidence from wp:rs, the statements should be deleted, not the tags.--Work permit (talk) 07:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:RS does not require every sentence to have an inline citation. Also, citations are not generally required in the lead on an article. Do you believe some of the sentences are in error, or are you just trying to make some sort of point? If it is the later, please see WP:POINT. If the former, please mention here what sentences you believe are in error or questionable. Thanks, JMG (talk) 05:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not asking for inline citations. I'm just asking for references to verify the claims. The tags I put are the statements I question. I don't think its up to me to "prove" they are wrong. Lets take the first tag you removed: The salute is thought to have been used in the Roman Republic, but there is no clear evidence of this. Who thought that? I have no reason to believe that it was, in fact, used in Rome (except perhaps for the trivial observation that sticking your hand up is a natural gesture). I suspect it was a common device used in oratory. Josephus does state that Roman soldiers, breaking camp, raised their right arms in the air with a shout to express enthusiasm. But actually, maybe it was used as salute. Maybe there IS clear evidence. I really don't know, and I don't think the article provides any references that makes me comfortable one way or the other. The next tag: Indeed it is not known for certain whether salutes as military courtesy existed at all in Roman culture. Well maybe that's true, but again, I don't know Do you? I have more serious issue with these early images of the gesture are not strictly speaking salutes, since most actually depict the swearing of oaths. It was with this function that the so-called Bellamy salute was adopted in the United States in 1892 as part of the Pledge of Allegiance., the implication is that the oath was derived from the roman salute. I've seen mentions after the fact that note the resmblance, but I haven't come across a reference that states that bellamy salute was based on the roman salute.--Work permit (talk) 05:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:LEADCITE

I've added citation tags to the lead. The lead SHOULD summarize the body, but it doesn't. And the statements in the lead are unreferenced as is most of the body of the article.--Work permit (talk) 09:57, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed original research tag

I removed the wp:or tag that I placed on the article some months ago. I've added cited material, and so I think the tag no longer applies--Work permit (talk) 08:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed citation tag on article.

I've removed the citation tag on the article, I think it's reasonably cited now--Work permit (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)