Talk:Titus Aebutius Helva

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Titus Aebutius Helva article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography: Military

	Biography portal 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 is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: Biography / Roman & Byzantine / Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

He is the father

There seems to be some confusion about this issue. Referring to who is the father and who is the son as "was" is incorrect because they remain father and son. Nothing will ever change that. One and in this case, both are dead but they remain father and son so when you say "so and so" was the father of "so and so", that is an incorrect statement of fact. They remain father and son, even in death. If you want to refer to a relationship between two people as being a "was" then that is your own misapplication of tense on the situation. The relationship of father to son or son to father can never change therefore it can never be a was. Even with modern technology the relationship between two people can be established even if they both contest it since DNA and gnomes etc. can be tested.66.74.176.59 (talk) 03:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that the confusion is entirely on your part. When we refer to someone who is no longer living, we nearly always use the past tense. This includes relationships between people. Stating that one person was another's father does not imply that he relinquished fatherhood to someone else; that interpretation is nonsensical. When people die, they stop being referred to in the present tense, even if the condition being referred to doesn't change. George Washington was a former President; nobody took his former presidency away. He was American; he didn't stop being American when he died, but he stopped being, so we say that he was. Babe Ruth was the most famous ballplayer who ever lived; nobody else has since become the most famous ballplayer who ever lived; Babe Ruth is still the most famous. But he's not alive, so we say that he was, not that he is. So while Titus Aebutius wasn't replaced as Lucius' father when he died, it's not idiomatic to say that he is the father. He was the father, and Lucius was his son, not is, any more than he is a former consul. When he was alive, you could have said that he is. But not anymore. P Aculeius (talk) 07:18, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

His name

Just how likely is the form "Helva"? I've only seen that form as one of the corrupt names in the Chronography of 354. A more likely form that I've seen might be "Alba"; & maybe "Elva" is the Old Latin form of Alba. (Just guessing here; I really don't have any evidence either way.) -- llywrch (talk) 00:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he's found as "Helva" in a number of secondary sources, although I seem to recall that the one I found discussing both forms said that "Elva" was more correct. I don't know what the basis for this conclusion was, but it could well be that "Helva" crept in by accident from less reliable but more readily available manuscripts. And after all, it does seem like the kind of metathesis that's likely to occur in Latin just as it would in English; unfamiliar words beginning with a vowel gain an "h", while others beginning with an "h" lose it. However, I don't recall if the name was discussed in DGRBM or OCD2 or some other source. P Aculeius (talk) 02:15, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Elva is an outdated form of the name. Broughton, the PW, the Fasti Capitolini, etc. use Helva, as well as most wikis in other languages. @P Aculeius and Llywrch: T8612 (talk) 12:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]