User talk:Wetman/archive14Sept2009

Pillow lavas

The lava entering the sea on Hawaii is a nice image and thanks for adding it, but it's more appropriate for the hyaloclastite article, so I've added it there instead.:-) (It also forced me to expand the article, which is never a bad thing) Mikenorton (talk) 09:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the forcing part. It looked too good to miss entirely. Thank you for giving it an appropriate setting. I lurk at Commons:Gallery of new files sometimes, for random surprises.--Wetman (talk) 10:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Nah, it's good to be forced occasionally, all to easy to think 'I must sort that out sometime' and then do nothing about it. Mikenorton (talk) 10:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Roman Religion

Hi Wetman - I saw your username on the article talk-page. I've been eyeing this one up for a while from my quiet, safe corner (a bit of a monster, isn't it?) and have finally plucked up enough idiocy to have a go. D'you have an interest in the article? Honour to your ubiquity... Haploidavey (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't know much about Roman cultus but the article could use some dedicated editing. My excellent book on the History of Private Life doesn't cover much religion, which seems to me either unremittingly civic and dull, or else obscurely rustic, aboriginally ancient and scarcely knowable. Decline of Graeco-Roman polytheism is more for me. I could work in a report of Ramsay Macmillan, The Christianization of the Roman Empire there, then make a condensed version of that article for the closing section of Religion in ancient Rome, shall I?--Wetman (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

A closing section would be very useful. For the rest, I too know very little of the groundwork, but am using Brent's Imperial Cult (and others) for other articles, and might be able to provide a cautious anthropological basis. Leastways, I think so. Aboriginal, ancient and scarcely knowable it is. So here's to it... Haploidavey (talk) 00:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, Imperial cult has the distinct advantage of being constructed, in part following Hellenistic rulers' examples, with later (third century) input from Persia , and better documented too. Women's religion is an aspect usually underepresented, as it's so scarcely documented (by men, eh); there should be something directly following "Household religion".--Wetman (talk) 01:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of History of bread

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article History of bread, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

This appears just to be a copy of the existing "History of bread" section on Bread

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Zoe O'Connell ⚢⚧ (talk) 22:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

De mirabilibus urbis Romae

Hello! Your submission of De mirabilibus urbis Romae at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

Oop!I've added to that footnote the reference I'd dropped in the editing process, which is M. R. James, "Magister Gregorius de Mirabilibus Urbis Romae" The English Historical Review 32 No. 128 (October, 1917:531-554) p. 531.--Wetman (talk) 02:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

What rat? I only see a python.

Evidence demanded for a Userpage statement

Under the headline I don't buy this. Evidence?: "Virtually every European or Near Eastern basilica or cathedral founded before 600 CE occupies the consecrated site of a pagan temple of one kind or another." Building materials used from a near older structure. But not the site of pagan temple of one kind or another. Show me.Kazuba (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

No one can "show" you. You need to read. It's never too late to begin.--Wetman (talk) 01:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It's a tad overstated, & I'd question the date. Most operational temples remained so until 397 (was it?) when pagan ceremonies were forbidden, and apparently temple sites were actually shunned by Christian builders for a couple of generations after, by which time a great number of major churches were already established. Johnbod (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Showing the choir of San Salvatore, Spoleto, within the cella of a Roman temple

The titulus churches of Rome on the one hand, and gifts of imperial sites (which naturally couldn't have been temple fanes) are some exceptions. Even among the tituli of Rome, however, see how many are built on previously consecrated space. Another set of exceptions are provided by the great institutional churches that developed from abbatial churches: abbeys, as far as the Rhineland and as late as the tenth century were founded on gifts of intact Roman villas, rather than on previously consecrated ground. The great number of those Christian foundations Johnbod mentions date to the fifth century, rather than the fourth, when the Christians weren't powerful enough yet to take over pagan sites. In hagiography, of course, temples collapse of their own accord,, ruins to be quarried and in Italy, they are spared destruction specifically when Christian churches are built within them: examples abound, though the Parthenon is not the only temple that has been cleared of its church. In the fictitious vita of Porphyry of Gaza the narrative includes the physical occupation of a temple as one of the details intended to build verisimilitude, a detail all the more instructive as it is probably not history, though "routinely cited as real history... because it is full, specific and vivid", as Ramsay MacMullen notes in Christianizing the Roman Empire (p 86). Control of the local holy places, what's more, is always an essential in creating a new establishment, from post-Augustinian England to the Sultanate of Delhi. Perhaps a revised statement should read "Virtually every European or Near Eastern Christian basilica or cathedral founded after the outlawing of pagan temples in 391 occupies the consecrated site of a pagan temple of one kind or another."? Where there is contentious opposition— who normally posts "I don't buy this. Evidence?" of a Userpage?— one should be scrupulously accurate. --Wetman (talk) 22:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Showing the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina!

Mr. Wetman, I'm sorry if I came across harsh. It is just the way I talk. I am no good with words. The environmental world of conversation I am accustomed to had little or no finesse. In my world contentious is down and out profanity, kicking you in the head when you are down, killing you with a baseball bat and threatening the lives of your loved ones. I grew up in the street world of the uneducated and dog eat dog and it shows every now and then. Please forgive me for being awkward with words. I lack the skills. Kazuba (talk) 02:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The Maison Carrée, one of the Paestum temples, & of course the Pantheon are other ex-temple-ex-churches. We are a bit vague on when the Parthenon was churchified - given the churches at Hadrian's Library next door, I suspect rather late. The "temple of Concordia" at Agrigento was 597 apparently, just in time for your deadline! I wonder if temples of the Imperial cult were especially prone to be converted? Johnbod (talk) 23:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, look at the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina! Near the Parthenon, the Temple of Hephaestus owes its coherent survival to its churchification. The very name of Santa Maria sopra Minerva would alert one to this phenomenon; it was churchified so late that there were few remaining standing pagan structures left in Rome to sanctify.

I like them re-classicising A&F for the visit of Charles V; that must have puzzled the pilgrims. Johnbod (talk) 01:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm now making it a practice to link text to Christianized sites every time I come upon a mention of a Christian structure occupying a pagan sacred site. The truth is in the mountain of examples--Wetman (talk) 18:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't seen that before. So far it notably lacks a "mountain of examples". As mentioned above, I doubt if "Few Christian churches built in the first half millennium of the established Christian Church were not built upon sites already consecrated as pagan temples or as high places.." is true; I think this is characteristic of a later stage, including just the end of that period, or does the "half millennium" just begin in the 4th century? - that could be made clearer. To some extent it is just the handiness of materials, or the obvious choice of prominent sites in a city. About the 2 oldest churches in near-original condition in England, Church of St Peter-on-the-Wall, Bradwell-on-Sea and All Saints' Church, Brixworth, both use Roman secular materials from what were already ruins nearby, respectively a fort and villa, but I doubt there is much significance to that beyond convenience. And to the ancient Romans & Greeks cemetries were the opposite of "high places" - they insisted theyt were placed outside the city walls, like modern sewage works. Johnbod (talk) 20:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Why, yes, John. "The first half millennium of the established Christian Church" couldn't be thought of beginning before the fourth century; the Christianized sites before that are more typically in the domus of a patron (San Clemente, etc) and never a pagan holy site. The beginnings can be dated about the time the Christian mob destroyed the Serapeum. Not previously Romanized areas were not being evangelised until Saint Boniface in the eighth century, with his legendary felling of Thor's Oak. You're right of course about the convenience of pre-cut stone; I was thinking of Italy and Gaul really, in writing that... but do you think there is ever a "Saint X's Well" in England or Wales that is not a pagan site?

Setton (Athens in the Middle Ages, 197) places the consecration of the Parthenon "certainly after Justinian's time". And the Pantheon is still a church, right? I observed a Catholic service there in 2003. Srnec (talk) 04:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I expect you're right about the wells, but wells are not a usual location otherwise for Christian worship; isolated high crosses are similar. An instruction from one of the Borgia Popes survives to end the practice of holding services in "the cave with the painted bulls" in a northern Spanish diocese - don't ask me where I read that though. Johnbod (talk) 17:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for De mirabilibus urbis Romae

On April 19, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article De mirabilibus urbis Romae, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 23:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow!

Working miracles now, are we? Amandajm (talk) 15:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

The 1951 Venice ball of Carlos (Charles) de Beistegui

Hi, Wetman. Just in case you don't have Talk:Alexis von Rosenberg, Baron de Rédé on your watchlist, the celebrated 1951 Venice ball is now covered at Carlos de Beistegui, although it could, as you say, merit an article of its own. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)\

Very well done, too. Now I know something about Beistegui beyond Palazzo Labia and Groussay. The throwing the dishes in the canal tale was originally said of Agostino Chigi; was it ever really said of Beistegui I wonder. Weren't the Duck and Doochess forbidden to go, while Britain was still on rationing?--Wetman (talk) 22:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

If only I'd been invited, I could have told you. A shocking social faux pas on Beistegui's part, don't you think (let's just ignore the fact that I was only 10 months old at the time). In the absence of personal evidence, I can but report what others have written about it. You're welcome to challenge those bits if you're so disposed. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What? and risk Original Research? I was nine myself. The best contemporary report was in Vogue in the winter of 1952. Click here for a good Internet report. I don't have Alexis de Redé's memoirs, which doubtless give good quotable details. The extraordinary thing, looking at Beaton's photos, is how knowledgeable all the details were-- Jacques Fath in a Louis XIV court ballet costume, Daisy Fellowes as La Regina d'Africa, all drawn from porcelains and tapestries. Today, even actresses don't know how to move in those clothes. --Wetman (talk) 06:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I can't help thinking that Elton John must have been inspired by Beistegui's own costume, for that absolutely off-the-planet wig-encrusted garb he wore at his 50th birthday, that looked like it took up the entire room. -- JackofOz (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Misapplied patriotism?

Political dinosaurs

Saw this & thought of you! Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_April_25#Category:Dinosaurs_of_Niger. Johnbod (talk) 17:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, and under that header I expected a comment about Arlen Specter. You were recalling the zany map at right?--Wetman (talk) 23:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That's right. We are sheltered from news of the Spectersauros here. Johnbod (talk) 03:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

DYK for La Porta

On April 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article La Porta, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 18:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

DYK issue

Hello! Your submission of Woolmer Forest at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 00:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Massacre of the Innocents

I reverted an edit you made to Massacre of the Innocents, but as I respect you as an editor perhaps I've misunderstood. Yet it seemed to me that you were advancing something that had no foundation in published sources - an opinion that was your own. Anyway, let us talk this out if you think I was wrong to revert you. PiCo (talk) 07:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what it is that you don't like. My edit restored the fact that Macrobius was writing four centuries later, an incontrovertible fact that had been suppressed, perhaps thoughtlessly. You've noticed, I'm sure, that I did not retain the assertion, questionable itself, the reliability of this account is questionable. And my edit Macrobius' statement shows that the tradition of the massacre of the innocents had become firmly established in the culture at large even though he was not Christian himself, doesn't seem to be a statement that anyone would resent, so I'm a bit at a loss, PiCo. --Wetman (talk) 11:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I put it back. :) PiCo (talk) 00:31, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for setting it to rights; your habitual courtesy is not invariably found at Wikipedia, regrettably. --Wetman (talk) 00:47, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Gasparo Contarini

"Though he participated at the Diet of Worms, April 1521, he never saw or spoke with Martin Luther." Did you write this edit? If so, upon what source do you base this information? Thank you for your help. Wikimeow (talk) 19:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I vaguely remember reading this, perhaps in the Wikipedia article. I just sought "Gasparo Contarini Luther" at Scholar Google and read a footnote from Kenneth M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant (1204-1571), p. 298. Their itineraries overlapped. Perhaps you'd like to drop the Luther [mis]connection.--Wetman (talk) 21:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Chimera (mythology)

I honestly have no idea how the reference to eyes got in. I added the citation of the sight of the chimera indicating disaster. I will ensure that the eyes reference is not in my contribution and will attempt to add the correct information again. I try to assist Wikipedia, not vandalize it.Merotoker1 (talk) 19:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

(Wetman made no reference to vandalism. He noted at User talk:Merotoker1 "Having two different eye colors, though a symptom related to the biological meaning of 'chimera' given in a dictionary, is irrelevant to the subject of this article. Can you see why the following sentence just isn't good enough, even if its sense were relevant: 'The term chimera has also come to mean more generally, an impossible or foolish fantasy, or if you have two different eye colors' . This is not the first time this particular red herring has been dragged across the Chimera's track, however. Wetman (talk) 20:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC))

Medieval cuisine

Thanks for adding new material. I made some edits and added som comments about the new content on the talkpage. Do you think you could take a look at it?

Peter ^Isotalo 21:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I've done so, and responded at Talk:Medieval cuisine.--Wetman (talk) 04:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Praise of the Two Lands (ship)

I am doing research for above potential new article. All I know now is that it was 100 cubits long, of cedarwood, and made by Sneferu about 2613 BC, some say 2680 BC. It is the first known named ship. Does JSTOR have anything on it or do you have suggestions on how to research further? Google and Google books reveals little. Need 1500 characters of info for _________. Yep, you guessed it! Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:28, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, the expression "Praise of the Two Lands" hasn't appeared in any of the articles archived at JSTOR; the Two Lands would be Upper and Lower Egypt. Perhaps it is discussed by Egyptologists under an Egyptian name. The Argo is noted in Homer. Sorry not to be much help here, D.C. --Wetman (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing so quickly I put up the article today. Many thanks for the improvements!! I can always count on you for great edits. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You often find interesting subjects worth an article, D.C.. I think you should parse your sentences at the end, to make sure that they really are saying what you actually do mean: this sounds simplistic, but it's advice I've successfully given graduate students in writing a thesis, and it untangles many snarls. --Wetman (talk) 00:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for advice. You are my mentor. Any advice you can give me I'll take to heart. I'll try to look things over closer on the grammer etc to make sure they are saying what I mean. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The Ladies' Mercury

The Ladies' Mercury contained the first advice column for a periodical. Do you have any advice you can give me for the new article? Thanks! --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Let me rephrase that: The Ladies' Mercury is the first periodical for women and it contained an advice column. See, you were right! I didn't word it correctly to really mean what I intended. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I've made my usual tweaks, each intended for a specific reason, which I hope you'll detect and approve. None intended simply to substitute my word for yours. Check this diff: see how I substituted a more vivid verb for "was". The UK not existing, I made it "England and Scotland", which keeps the frame of reference in 1693, not to distract the reader with today. The "publication" didn't do any deciding: it was the editor who did. I shifted "printed in London" away from a sentence where it wasn't part of the immediate topic of the sentence. I managed to build parenthetical phrases into the texture of a sentence. Added a useful link, too! --Wetman (talk) 01:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, what great improvements. I always learn a lot from you. I like that link to The Athenian Society. Interesting that UK didn't exist at that time, didn't know that. Sorry about the confusion of The Ladies' Mercury having the first advice column. Famous First Facts, which I have found to be a reliable reference source, says "The first advice column appeared in the first issue (dated Feb 27, 1693) of the first magazine for women, The Ladies Mercury"; however this reference says, "To cater for the popularity of these topics, the editors announced on 3 June 1691 that the issue of the first Tuesday of each month would be set aside 'to answer reasonable questions sent to us by the fair sex' and in February 1693 Dunton launched a short-lived spin-off publication, the Ladies Mercury, to answer similar quieries." So it looks like to me that an "advice column" (or similar) was already going shortly after 3 June 1691. While the February 1693 issue obvioulsy contained an advice column, perhaps it was not the first time the idea was introduced by Dunton or the editors of the Athenian Mercury. I got confused on that point, so left out the bit on the advice column and just entered the article into DYK as the first periodical for women (which I figured was safe). I was excited and surprised to be able to find the first copy of The Ladies' Mercury from 1693. Didn't think such would still exist. Thanks again for your improvements. They are always automatically approved, as far as I am concerned. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The Athenian Mercury

Finally figured out that The Athenian Mercury published by John Dunton did use the advice column format first in 1690 when I researched for the new article on it. It was not The Ladies' Mercury, which I figured there was something wrong there. You got me thinking on that and it turned out to be another article, which I will submit for DYK tomorrow. Thanks again, since you got me thinking on this subject of the "advice column." --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:59, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Been expanding the article and looking over your reference of "Lacedaemonia, or Sparta, being the antagonist of Athens in ancient Greece." Tom Brown was the chief editor of The Lacedemonian Mercury, the copycat of Dunton's Athenian Mercury. I believe Dunton was trying to be sarcastic here at the bottom of page 190 but I am not sure how to word it. Low priority, but if you have any ideas on this in the next couple of days, could (or should) there be additional added about this to the article? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he was being ironic; it all seems directly and frankly narrated, though season'd with the author's many underlinings. The "Mr. Settle" who wrote the skit was Elkanah Settle. Thank you for introducing me to Mr. Dunton, who seems to afford most aimiable company. That is a nice compliment of Nahum Tate's. And I see that Jonathan Swift also laid a compliment tribute to the Athenians. Among Mr Dunton's many Projects, I knew that "The Post-boy robb'd of his mail" was carried to fruition, though I never did yet suspect Mr. Dunton of complicity in the scheme..--Wetman (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Attributing Author (Photographer: Louise Bialik) for Simon House's Wiki Page

Hello, the photo linked to Simon House'spage was photographed by Louise Bialik and there is a condition in the free use license that the photo must be attributed to the author, so you should make note somewhere on the Simon House page that the photograph was taken by Louise Bialik.

The Photograph was taken on July 15, 2008, in Cornwall, England. (Details of location are helpful)

To help your revision run more smoothly, the URL for the Simon House page is at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_House

And photo from Wikimedia Commons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Simonhouse2008LB.jpg

Permission detail leads to this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License

Note the conditions:

Material licensed under the current version of the license can be used for any purpose, as long as the use meets certain conditions.

All previous authors of the work must be attributed. All changes to the work must be logged. All derivative works must be licensed under the same license. The full text of the license, unmodified invariant sections as defined by the author if any, and any other added warranty disclaimers (such as a general disclaimer alerting readers that the document may not be accurate for example) and copyright notices from previous versions must be maintained. Technical measures such as DRM may not be used to control or obstruct distribution or editing of the document.

Kind Regards, and thank you for all your efforts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hergart (talk • contribs) 06:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I just found it among "Latest files" at Commons. What do I know? Will I get Points Off? Serves me right for touching anything post 1910. --Wetman (talk) 07:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Aha! fixed it.--Wetman (talk) 13:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Riace Warriors?

Hi Wetman. I'm surprised to find this article at "Riace Warriors", instead of "Riace bronzes". Paul August ☎ 03:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

In the Category:5th-century BC Greek sculptures the only object titled "Such-and-so Marble" or "Such-and-So Bronze" is the Artemision Bronze: is that a good precedent? Thus, shall the Ludovisi Throne— "it's not a throne", the recent graduates cry, as with one voice— be Wikipedified as the Ludovisi Marble"? Truly, as long as redirects from the most obvious search terms do land the reader in the right spot, I've learned not to care much. Or be too surprised. --Wetman (talk) 03:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm familiar with them (I've got a place in Calabria) and I've only ever heard them called the "Riace bronzes" in English, see for example [1]. Would you object if I moved the article? Paul August ☎ 04:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

...no, not even to Bronzi di Riace.--Wetman (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Council of Bourges

On May 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Council of Bourges, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Woolmer Forest

On May 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Woolmer Forest, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 20:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Antonio Latini

On May 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Antonio Latini, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 00:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Gardens

Just re-reading comments on my page regardimg gardening; in your desire for a front and back garden, you are clearly unaware of the gardening book (I think by a Rothschild - i must look it up) that began "All gardens, no matter how small, should contain at leat 2.5 acres of woodland." A view with which I completely agree. Giano (talk) 12:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

From a talk to the City Gardening Society in about 1910 I believe. "All gardens, no matter how small, should contain a few acres of rough woodland." is how I remember it. Johnbod (talk) 14:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I confess I read your comment, Johnbod, and my first thought was "My goodness, just how old *is* he?" I really need to get out more. Risker (talk) 14:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC) Please excuse my sudden appearance here, Wetman; I like to keep a few intellectually stimulating pages on my watchlist. This one is much more interesting than a lot of other places I hang out.

Don't worry, I wasn't there! Johnbod (talk) 14:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Lionel de Rothschild seems to be the usual suspect, though the precise dosage of woodland required varies from 1 to 15 acres, with 2 the statistical mode: [2]. Personally I think the vagueness of "a few" is better. Johnbod (talk) 15:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Lionel was a very odd man, used to dress fleas up and have them perform. Sorry nothing to do with garening, but quite interesting in a strange sort of way. I had thought the comment was probably by Miriam Rothschild, she was also odd and let her house become covered in creeper so she could not see out. Giano (talk) 22:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I've heard that remark, and it is worth tracking down; I'd have guessed Miss Jekyll, describing her own "little garden", Munstead Wood. Even a detached villa (English expression) on an American street or subdivision has a front and a back, though, with a driveway on one side and, on the other. the perilous "side yard" with the property line vigorously marked, sometimes by both a fence and hedging. Even for people who have bought such a house to make it as attractive as possible and re-sell it, it goes against the grain, I've found, to throw this passageway space together into one and share it. You'd have thought I was a Bolshevik!--Wetman (talk) 16:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

They're probably right; there's nothing that alarms buyers and their lawyers more than a shared passageway or space, here anyway. Johnbod (talk) 16:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Alexander Sarcophagus

I noticed that this article does not agree with the mention of the sarcophagus in the Alexander article. Knowing nothing of the issue myself, I thought I would draw it to your attention. Also the Schefold name, I think, is misspelled Schefield in your reference note. Rmhermen (talk) 03:26, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

..and 'Schefeld', too! Thanks for that: I've fixed it, and the text about the Alexander Sarcophagus at Alexander the Great, too, I hope to your satisfaction. (As for me, I only know what I've been reading.).--Wetman (talk) 04:28, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Gaddi Torso

On May 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gaddi Torso, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 13:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Typhon NPOV tag?

Hello. I saw that you removed the NPOV tag from the Typhon article; it was added last week by Next-Genn-Gamer. I left a message at his talk page asking why he added it, and have yet to receive a reply. This weekend, I plan on grabbing my copy of the Oxford Classical Dictionary and my Hesiod and cleaning this article up a bit. Regards. MWShort (talk) 16:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you: drive-by taggers are essentially scribble-vandals, though as long as they've logged in, one dare not say so, eh. Perhaps you'd begin by tying the article more closely to a range of specific classical sources (Theoi.com assembles them in English) and introducing some themes under sub-headings, such as "Typhon and Delphyne". That would start to clean it up. Robin Lane Fox's new Travelling Heroes In the Epic Age of Homer has opened up the meaningfulness of myths that are reflected in non-Hellene places round the Mediterranean shores and the Greek homeland. Delphyne is one of these refracted figures, and Robin Lane Fox is always remarkable for clarity of thought. --Wetman (talk) 16:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Gertrude Jekyll

Dear Sir: Do not refer to me as a "prankster" or to any sort of vandalism. The only difference between my last edit (over a month ago) on the Gertrude Jekyll page and the current version were the tags I placed (tone, POV) and if I placed them then I had good reason to do so and stand by them.

Your offensive comments and your placing your ridiculous message on my userpage and not my talk page where it belongs -- actually does not belong -- indicate to me that you lack good faith (WP:AGF), wikietiquette (WP:CIVIL) and basic wikicommunication skills, all of which are essential. I suggest you brush up. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 21:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wetman is neither so easily bamboozled or intimidated. He never sees "Wikiquette" and "assume good faith" templates brandished by any serious editor with a modicum of collegiality. This prankster's tagging of the article Gertrude Jekyll for tone and POV [sic] was not accompanied by any opening of discourse at Talk:Gertrude Jekyll, which would have more convincingly demonstrated a serious purpose. No pert suggestions of "brushing up" are welcomed. Further trashtalk from this User will be deleted without comment. --Wetman (talk) 22:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wetman's resources of patience and forbearance are in perennially short supply. Principles of triage require that no more of these reserves be expended than any one situation requires. Your understanding is appreciated.

DYK

I have commented on your DYK nomination here. Cheers, —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I mistook it for the pendant of the Order of the Holy Spirit, in which the dove is superposed over the center of the Maltese cross. I shall correct my error at the DYK page--Wetman (talk) 21:49, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Procopio Cutò

I noticed that you have edited several times Café Procope in the past. I have a new biography article on the founder Procopio Cutò.

You can't say "Francesco Procopio dei Knives", DG, any more than you can translate Mme de Pompadour as "Mlle Fish". I'm sorry to see fragments like this: the man's biography is just part of the story of Café Procope; without the café he's just not notable. That he's a noble is very unlikely.

Thanks Wetman for correcting that of "dei Knives". Apparently he is also associated with gelato as this article and several other similar ones point out. This article says: Francesco Procopio dei Coltelli, born in Sicily, is reported to be the first gelato entrepreneur. So would he not be notable by his association to being the first in the gelato business? The article on gelato points out the importance of Procopio to the gelato history as is also shown in this reference. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

However, perhaps you could help me on a pair of articles I have expanded on May 11 of Marc Sautet and the philosophy cafes he founded called Café Philosophique. The hook I submitted is: that Marc Sautet (pictured) started the philosophy cafes known as Café Philosophique? I think it needs a little more pizazz. It has not been selected and approved yet. This was the first of the modern trend of "philo cafes" since I believe Socrates had something similar in his time period. Any ideas? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The plural is Cafés Philosophiques. Wouldn't a more grammatical English version be "philosophical café". How about

...that Marc Sautet (pictured) started the kind of open philosophical discussions gatherings in Parisian cafes under the rubric "Café Philosophique"?

Wetman (talk) 21:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Great! Have submitted that as an ALTERNATE. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I have submitted 6 alternate hooks for the DYK submission under May 18 since I have done additional research and expanded the article on Procopio Cutò. If you have further ideas on these or any others I would welcome them. Thanks Wetman. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I have submitted as ALT9 a hook I believe would get much attention, especially if it happened to be first in the queue. If you have time, look it over for any copyediting it may need for improvements and perhaps you know the litature term I am speaking of. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 15:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Suffolk Mills Group

The SMG would make a good article. Main problem is that the vast majority of material about the group is in print form, which I don't have. Of course, once one group has an article, the others will all want one too! Mjroots (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I had searched "Suffolk Mills Group" at Wikipedia, and the number of hits suggested that its record of accomplishment forms a kind of node for those researching East Anglian mills. Just a brief note of when it was founded, and linked mentions of Wikipedia articles on mills whose restoration it has fostered would make a healthy start. At Wikipedia, others are sure to come along and fill in our blanks!--Wetman (talk) 17:35, 20 May 2009 (UTC)--Wetman (talk) 17:35, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Strangwish

I'd taken my lead from the NPG article. I try not to look at ODNB until I have a 90% finished article as its too easy to commit plagiasism without having any intent. (If I look later then I have I hope a novel structure). I have seen other 19C geneologys of Strangeways who call the ancient ones "Strangwish". I'll look at ODNB and rethink. Actually he should be findable under all these names I guess. Thx Victuallers (talk) 14:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I see. Then "Henry Strangwish" appears in other contemporary documents under that name, I assume: Stranguish is another obscure spelling. The Fox-Strangways family of a later time are especially well-known through Henry Fox and the Earls of Ilchester.--Wetman (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I added to his article that Gerlach Flicke, the pirate's pal, was often recorded in England as "Garlicke" - one of their more creative manglings of names. Johnbod (talk) 17:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Guivre

Please read my response. As I stated there the guivre is most often portrayed as serpentine, and the rest is at the talk page. ceranthor 23:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

A condensed (and perhaps improved) version of guivre is at wyvern, where English readers will find it. It will not come as a shock to most lurkers here that the two words are cognates for the same imagined beast.--Wetman (talk) 04:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Liber Floridus

I have expanded this article you started. One issue I am confused on is the New Advent reference. It says: He is probably identical with Lambert, the Canon of St. Omer who wrote the famous "Liber floridus", a kind of encyclopedia of Biblical, chronological, astronomical, geographical, theological, philosophical and natural history subjects, a detailed description of which is given in the "Historia comitum Normannorum, comitum Flandriae". Are they one and the same? This seems to be backed-up in The Medieval Bestiary source

There could probably be a DYK from the article if you want to self-nominate, something like:

... that the Liber Floridus is one of the most famous encyclopedias of the Middle Ages?

I am going on a ten day camping trip tomorrow morning. Will let you take it from here. Cheers. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Since the Abbey of Saint Bertin is at Saint-Omer, the Lambert of one is the Lambert of the other.--Wetman (talk) 17:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Marcello Massarenti

‘Has to be Wetman‘, I thought, as the first sentence approached its period. ‘Good.’

I’ve attempted a typo fix towards the end: but of course you may want to fix my guesswork. By the way, are the pages you cite from William R. Johnston covered in this adapted extract? If so, a link might be useful for future editors. Ian Spackman (talk) 10:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Cool, Ian Spackman! I've added your link as a footnote. That first sentence doesn't seem to bear my hallmark convolutions— my failing, according to those whose lip muscles ache from following them— but actually quite succinct!--Wetman (talk) 06:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I enjoyed the ‘Cool’, although sadly the term was an archaicism—as ancient and dreary as Elvis—when the English language made its attempt to embrace me in my teenage years. And, having being born on the wrong side of the pond, I was quite unaware that its birth had roughly coincided with a much less interesting parturition. Still, I wouldn’t like you to think that I found that first sentence over-wrought. Unlike the other Italy-related new articles I was skimming through it was a wrought sentence: by Wikipedia standards extremely cool. Ian Spackman (talk) 17:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm too hip to be cool. And too old to be either...--Wetman (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 19:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Wyvern

We need the Shuker, Rose, and Dickens references to support your citations. Thank you. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I supplied the references for the text I transfered from the unnecessary duplicate article Guivre. Taggers who pepper articles with are seldom regarded at Wikipedia as the models of intellectual probity to which they aspire. A tagger is not an editor. --Wetman (talk) 17:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Was that comment necessary? I rarely leave more than one or two of these tags, but I simply don't have all night to hunt down the sources. As I said in my edit summary, I will work on hunting them down later. If you wish to impeach my editing prowess, I would suggest you first work on providing complete citations! ;-P Wilhelm_meis (talk) 17:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Very pert indeed. Next!--Wetman (talk) 17:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I didn't tag any of your stuff, and I didn't ask you to provide all of those. I will get to it later. In all seriousness, though, I agree a tagger does not an editor make. But the tags can be useful. If you look back just a little bit in the history, you will see that all that stuff was unreferenced listcruft before I condensed it into prose. I'll get to the references later in the week if nobody beats me to it (and looking at the article history, nobody will). Have a good day. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 17:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:Better start

From what I've gathered from other sources too, it is the most common version of the tale. ceranthor 19:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles simply report published sources: telling the bedtime story of the Dragon of Mordiford as if the creature had a biography as a little girl's pet, is too simple-minded to be helpful. If you'd absorbed the "other sources" credited in the article, you'd have a grown-up account centered on the image of the dragon painted on the interior west wall of the church at [Mordiford, Herefordshire, remarked upon in the 17th century by John Aubrey yada yada yada. "From early life, the dragon, green in colour, loved a small girl named Maud who resided in Mordiford and had nurtured it from infancy." etc etc "Maud, insane with rage, burst from the surrounding forest and came to mourn her past pet" is too childish to be improved simply by editing. A better start, as I said at Talk:Dragon of Mordiford, can be made using the better of the two references, which you must have overlooked. --Wetman (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Château du Grand Jardin

Hello! Your submission of Château du Grand Jardin at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

Specifically, the article doesn't say anything about whether the chateau does or doesn't have bedrooms. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Quite right! I've made the interior arrangement clearer.--Wetman (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the tweaks! Good to know others are keeping an eye out for Byzantine stuff. :) Cheers, Constantine ✍ 19:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I had been unaware of the Church of St. Polyeuctus, in fact: good article!--Wetman (talk) 20:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Worcestershire

Hi! A WikiProject Worcestershire has now been created to better manage all articles that relate in any way to the county even if they overlap with other categories or projects. Please visit the project pages and if you see listed any articles you have written or contributed to, or if you would like to see more active development of them, don't hesitate to join the project.

Need a better word

I just wrote up the article on Jayco, Inc. I am looking for better phrasing or a better word in the current sentence:
The company name is derived from his middle name.
Something to the effect:
The company name is a __________ of Bontrager's middle name. ("Jay" + "company") I don't know this word or the correct phrasing it needs (if any). Help please. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:44, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Can't help this time: I don't have a word for a letter spelled out, as in dee or ess. Perhaps one of you lurkers do? But Doug's sentence looks fine as it stands. --Wetman (talk) 22:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reply Wetman.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Prometheus etymology edits.

Hey, Wetman. I think I may have led you astray in your recent editing of the etymology. When I originally did the footnote, I labored under the misapprehension that the pramanthas derivation had become definitive -- I certainly prefer it. But the "folk etymology" pro-manthano also has its adherents, so I rewrote the note to reflect that. I shall leave it to you to edit your own prose. Ifnkovhg (talk) 02:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Does pro-manthano have modern adherents? A footnote would be good, but I avoid tagging, which generally puts one in undesirable company.--Wetman (talk) 05:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association

The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome.

If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here

Please put all discussion here.Peter Damian (talk) 10:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

XN4

Thank you for nomination suggestions. But what is the story on XN4? Appears to have been blocked for socking. Peter Damian (talk) 17:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh goodness. My error, based on a couple of well-informed encounters. There is never a legitimate reason for duplicate accounts, I've found. Please delete my suggestion.--Wetman (talk) 17:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Le Maistre Chat, ou le Chat Botté (Puss in Boots)

Thanks for the heads up on the title! I'm not sure what to do. The title "Puss in Boots" is taken as are variants. Your suggestions are very much appreciated. I need some help on this one. Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I see the problem: unthinking Wikipedia runaround. Puss in Boots (fairy tale) is required only because "Puss in Boots" is taken up as a disambiguation page, which should be Puss in Boots (disambiguation), with the main article at Puss in Boots. Le Maistre Chat, ou le Chat Botté should be limited to Perrault's text: does this separate article serve the reader's needs better than a single, encyclopaedic article? I simply make these suggestions: you must distribute the text as you see fit, keeping the reader firmly in mind.--Wetman (talk) 19:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions and expertise! I created the Puss in Boots (disambiguation) page but have met with some difficulty in moving Le Maistre Chat, ou le Chat Botté (Puss in Boots) to simply Puss in Boots. I've requested admin help. I believe a separate article on Perrault's tale is necessary as the article Puss in Boots (fairy tale) is focused more on 'The Cat as Helper' in fairy tales rather than the background, publication history of, and commentary upon Perrault's tale. Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 20:56, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Right on! Make sure a concise version of Le Maistre Chat, ou le Chat Botté is inserted at the right moment in Puss in Boots, alerting the reader with a "hatnote" {{main|Le Maistre Chat, ou le Chat Botté}} right under its section heading.--Wetman (talk) 21:41, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Château du Grand Jardin

Hello! Your submission of Château du Grand Jardin at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! hamiltonstone (talk) 00:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Some munchkin brandishing its high school equivalency diploma was informing us that foreign expressions, like Château du Grand Jardin, needed to be italicized. Abort: who has the time?--Wetman (talk) 06:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice one!

I was chuffed the new article got a quality and interesting contribution so early in its life. Theres a lot more I might add about our pals the twins, but I didn't know the handle was a reference to the Dioscuri . FeydHuxtable (talk) 14:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hah! There ya go! and I was wondering whether it was too obvious. Keep on target with text that refers to them as a team at the Versailles talk. --Wetman (talk) 16:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

David Runciman review

Thank you for posting the link to this review on your user page. It will be very helpful for people who misunderstand the aims of Wikipedia and how editing culture here has evolved to read the piece. Two points which I feel were under-emphasized are: that in discussing a Los Angeles Times attempt to set up an editorial wiki, Runciman (and also Andrew Lih?) fails to mention that the advertising-driven commercial nature of such an effort differs significantly from Wikipedia in that it can discourage many contributors from wanting to add to something that generates profits for someone else without getting paid themselves, and: in discussing the brevity of the Columbia Encyclopedia entry on Ayn Rand and others, Runciman conveniently avoids calling attention to the production costs and portability limitations involved in publishing a bound volume that don't exist here. Again, overall it's an excellent link and I hope it provides food for thought to many readers. I'm posting it on my user page as well - crediting you for alerting me to it. Sswonk (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Now, don't go crediting me: I think I was cued through a remark by Peter Damian. Besides, not getting credit is part of the Zen of Wikipedia.--Wetman (talk) 23:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

WP edits as moves in a game

Hello Wetman. I liked your summary of WP edits as moves in a game, at the top of your user page. You used some quotation marks there - does this mean someone else made this proposal earlier? And, in a game there is usually a player and an opponent, and I wonder who the opponent is in this case. For extra credit, could you help quantify the value of moves in different areas? For those of us with limited time. EdJohnston (talk) 17:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The quotes and italics are simply to set the Rules apart from my commentary. Glad you liked it: an earlier editor read as far as "Wikipedia is a game..." and rushed here to berate me and furiously kick at my shins. There is no "opponent": Wikipedia is also an expanding four-dimensional neural network with links for nodes and synapses, of which the edges are receding faster than one can read. Do you think there are further rules to the game, leaving aside interaction with other players, with whom one brushes past or collides at nodes?--Wetman (talk) 23:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Established Editors

Discussion of objectives here. Peter Damian (talk) 20:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

That will take some absorbing. If this group starts to become political, I shall fade soundlessly like the Cheshire Cat.--Wetman (talk) 23:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Pantheon

Thanks for the hello and recommendation about creating a user page. Yours is a masterpiece. Mgsobo (talk) 20:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I just didn't want you to remain one of those red-link editors.--Wetman (talk) 23:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

Sorry, Wetman. You caught me on a bad day. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

My post may have seemed a little sharp. I meant it merely as cautionary, not to lose salvageable text. The result, anyway, is an improved article (Knickerbockers (clothing)), which is what counts in the long run. Thank you for your post: it quite melted my ice.--Wetman (talk) 20:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Muslim settlement of Lucera

many thanks to everyone for the editings only 2 points: 1. Sicily became majoritarian latin speaking and RC Catholic between 1240 and 1300, possibly later then 1300 (1400-1500 the greeks became a negligible minority and the last speakers disappeared probably in the XVI century, the last basilian monks dismissed the last remnats of greek between 1700 and 1761 - in 1761 the monastery San Michele Arcangelo di Troina was rebuilt and reorganized as fully western and roman), when Frederick became the King the RCs were the dominant group but possibly not yet the majority, may be "dominant" could be more correct 2. Louis IX is frequently titled "Re Santo", particularly in the catholic sources, that's the reason I used "Holy King", may be "King and Saint" would be a better solution in english regards Cunibertus (talk) 14:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

La Dauphine

should the last change you made to La Dauphine have a final e -- in a clean-up it was replaced where a stray quote mark was, might not be what you intended -- inserted a hidden note there with the same question -- 83d40m —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.196.169.194 (talk) 18:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Your hunch was right: if I added an extra e to La Dauphine it was a typo.--Wetman (talk) 22:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

RE: Autoreviewing

Well, as far as I know, flagged revisions is going to be added but not at the moment. This flag contains the single 'autopatroller' right, which formerly belonged to the admin group, to replace the bot's whitelist (notoriously unreliable). The page detailing this group is at WP:Autoreviewers. Keep up the good work and best wishes. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! My vanity is deflated to be whitelisted, if the list is unreliable. Oh well! I should be sorry to think that the administrators are automatically moved onto the list of autopatrollers ("hands outside the covers!") without any winnowing process. Privilege creep: I'd be cross to be winnowed out myself, I admit. --Wetman (talk) 00:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Do we want change?

I don't expect you to want to involve yourself in the probably heated debate which is likely to follow, but as one of the great content editors, it would be unseemly and discourteous to not notify you that I have started a ball rolling here User:Giano/The future all comments welcome - whatever their view! Giano (talk) 07:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Giano. I do feel that it's time for a discussion of Wikipedia's social structure, though I feel the best way forward— for me— is not to attract undesirable attention, of which there seems to be an endless supply.--Wetman (talk) 08:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC).

Unicorn alert

Any idea what is going on here? From my Mass of Saint Gregory - no unseemly levity please. Johnbod (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

On the right? Looks more like a peacock to me - believed to have flesh that did not decay by the Ancients (clearly very long before the empirical method) - thus symbol of immortality. Also sometimes used as a symbol of Easter, for similar reasons I guess. --Joopercoopers (talk) 00:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

No the narwhal tusk (aka uni-horn) held by the guy on the right. Has he dipped the tip in blood/wine? Johnbod (talk) 00:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Johnbod's article tells me more than I ever knew, which was just the miraculous appearance of the corpus on the altar-table: even the transubstantiation reference had escaped me. Certainly looks like a narwhal/unicorn horn; though he looks as if he's lighting it like a taper, Albrecht Dürer]'s representation of the Mass of St Gregory exhibits the Instruments of the Passion: is the narwhal's horn tipped with iron to represent the Spear of Longinus? --Wetman (talk) 04:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The Arma Christi are often shown as part of the vision, but I don't think it can be that. The appearance of the Holy Lance is pretty consistent, following the various relics. I suppose it could just be a candle, but I don't think even this provincial an artist would show the flame going off at 45° like a blow torch; and why show it so prominently, held by a courtier? Long candles can be prominent in other versions, but always held by the other officiating clergy, as you'd expect. I wonder if it is a test on the communion wine for poison? Perhaps advisable in the late 15th C Vatican. Maybe the tip of the horn is stained red from regular use? The figure is clearly lay, & doesn't seem at all military, with his purse & pattens. Johnbod (talk) 11:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's more sensible.--Wetman (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Virginia (Mercadante)

Thank you for the excellent proofread Wetman. The article is certainly clearer and flows better. I found no problems with any changes you made. All the best.Singingdaisies (talk) 06:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

That's good to hear. Thank you. --Wetman (talk) 06:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Just a note

I would like to say thanks again for all the help and advice you have given me in the past. Your scholarly words and good common sense advice mean a lot. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, thank you. But but this is not a good-bye, yes?--Wetman (talk) 19:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Nope! I only have 150 DYKs and have to go to 200 before I quite = years. Thinking up new subjects and ideas now. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

English Wikipedia's 3 millionth article

• I say we hit it 3 August.--Wetman (talk) 22:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Sweepstake? I'll take the 31st July. --Joopercoopers (talk) 08:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Noticed today that the 3,000,000 article was done for Beate Eriksen. Who won for closest guess?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Nerthus

While your comments are welcomed, the text in question here needs to be removed from the "Nerthus" article. There are a couple of problems with the content. From one angle, it is unsubstantiated, and unable to be substantiated since there is a scholarly consensus concerning 'earth mother / great goddess' theories. Pushing an opposite POV without evidence is irresponsible for the article's authors to do. From another, the information that was given was not even particularly substantial. It is a brief rambling assertion; not very encyclopaedic.

I have been working in academic research in pre-Christian northern European subject areas for over a decade, and I respectfully ask that you revert the 'reversion' of my changes. Wikipedia has enough errors already without adding to the list because you do not like how a change is implemented. Thanks. 216.69.219.3 (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

This commentary would be more effective at Talk:Nerthus. Wetman does not ordinarily take anonymous calls.--Wetman (talk) 23:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Rasa or Arsa

Did you see [3]? Johnbod (talk) 15:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No, even the springs at Pićan are new to me: there's nothing yet about the springs of the Raša at Wikipedia. --Wetman (talk) 19:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Raša River

Haven't properly reviewed this for DYK, but i think you'll hit a snag unless you improve the in-line citations in the second half of the article (10th century onward) - there are no inline cites in this part, making it hard to substantiate the claim that it has functioned as a border for 2K years :-) cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. The statements that I assembled from Wikipedia articles, I shall now hasten to substantiate in Shepherd's Historical Atlas, the first place an informed doubter would look.--Wetman (talk) 04:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Ink bamboo

Thanks for your slightly acerbic, but clearly good-faith concerns about the title of the new article Ink bamboo. A case can be made that the use of bamboo brushes and ink to paint a still-life depicting a section of a living bamboo plant is a genuine motif of East Asian visual art worthy of enumerated recognition.

Titling is a problem as you have pointed out - don't know if there is a solution. Any completely accurate title will appeal to the genuinely circular operation of mental consciousness required to appreciate this motif. The appreciation of infinite recursiveness is not a subject that is fully appreciated west of the Indus River, maybe because it is problematic in a mental world where supernatural monotheism is the default World view. Bigturtle (talk) 18:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I have been quite aware of the Chinese tradition of Ink paintings of bamboo since I was twelve or thirteen, and no case need be made to me. Still I sense that "Ink bamboo" [sic] is a not-quite-English translation of something, or perhaps the figment of some obscure personal struggle with a less-than-familiar subject. --Wetman (talk) 19:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Title changed to bamboo painting, which is the most common noun-adjective combination currently used to search for this subject on a prominent English-language search engine. Best wishes. Bigturtle (talk) 00:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think that works. It's much better, Thank you.--Wetman (talk) 04:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Raša River

On July 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Raša River, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Charles Boit

Thanks for the work on Boit. Enamel painting seems rather badly represented in Wikipedia. --Hegvald (talk) 22:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

...well, that's where you come in! Post a note here any time on anything in that line you do, and let me sweep through it, making links. It was a pleasure.--Wetman (talk) 22:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Italian Renaissance garden

I don’t know if you have spotted this new article, but it struck me as one with which you might wish to meddle. Best wishes, Ian Spackman (talk) 12:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I did spot it, but I thought I wouldn't meddle just yet: to insert names and dates and footnotes would alter its character.--Wetman (talk) 18:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Delmonico's Restaurant

Hi. I'm not really sure how you saw my edit as being a shut up revert. Sylvain and I have gone back and forth on the subject several times as to whether or not his edits constituted synthesis. Following the discussion on the talk page (where a third party agreed it was synthesis), Sylvain opened a thread at WP:ORN, where two other outside editors also agreed that it was synthesis. I was just reverting since I thought that the issue was over based on that, and I indicated as such in my edit comment. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

No, you just can't just blank someone's post on a Talkpage, simply because you don't like it, or feel that the point has already been made. It is unspeakably rude, and someone should have explained that to you before now.--Wetman (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What? It wasn't on the talk page, it was on the main page. You reverted my edit on the main article. I didn't revert anything on the talk page, and I would never do anything like that. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh goodness, I see that you are absolutely right, and that I have accused you of an act of which you would never be guilty, and I apologize for my hastiness. I struggle as you do, to keep pushers of personal attitudes out of the Wikipedia main space, and sometimes I just move too fast.--Wetman (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, that's alright. Would you mind undoing your revert and leaving a message on the talk page to reflect this? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Done.--Wetman (talk) 16:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello again

Back about a year ago you were so kind as to help me by reading through some of my new lace articles. I was wondering if you'd mind horribly doing the same for shed (weaving), which I fear is greatly in need of someone who isn't me reading through it and making it make sense, or telling me where there should be more explanation. I'm not sure how much of it will make sense to someone who doesn't know how to weave, for example. Loggie (talk) 16:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, for a technical article, I think you've already got it admirably clear. I have a new use of shed in my vocabulary now. --Wetman (talk) 16:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks-both for reading over that one and for selvage-I really appreciate having someone read over what I've written. Not quite sure what you meant by repetition-your comment in the knitted fabric section though-could you elaborate? Loggie (talk) 19:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

"Gramercy, Manhattan" [sic]

I'm a bit perplexed as to your note of 19 June after my signature here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gramercy,_Manhattan&action=history

Could you elucidate? Thanks.Terrapin7 (talk) 23:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

My posting should have had a new section heading: Terrapin7 was not being addressed. Some officious Wikipedian— not Terrapin7— had "emended" Notes to References. Tiresome bullying of the familiar kind. I scrupulously didn't say so, however, but merely returned the edit to read Notes again, with the summary footnotes called "Notes" below the text are a perfectly normal protocol around here: no need to "enforce". Quite aside from this (which I have fixed) Terrapin7's posting about "Gramercy Park" vs. "Gramercy" [sic] is accurate, though I didn't comment upon it. --Wetman (talk) 00:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification.Terrapin7 (talk) 00:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Flash-lamp

If you have some time, could you shed some light on the subject. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Outstanding editing, thanks. You always come up with the brighest ideas. I wished I could come up such flashes of inspiration.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The best I can do is shed some light on the person that introduced the flashlight to the world and the person that had the world's first practical facsimile machine, some 11 years before Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice, Doug. I asked a question re: the pantograph principle at Talk:Pantelegraph.--Wetman (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Earthquake of 1348

On July 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Earthquake of 1348, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: "Carbon neutral" (Eleventh night article)

I find it a bit hard to believe too, but according to the BBC it is carbon neutral, although of course they're not infalliable. I'd reword this, but more than likely that involve 'weasel words', ect. Would I be better to just remove this line? --Recipe For Hate (talk) 00:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, why not offer it as a direct quote, footnoted. That way scientific literacy won't be branded "Original Research".--Wetman (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Letters on a Regicide Peace

In this edit, you say: "the sentence is not completed". This on p. 320 has it shown that the sentence is completed. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No, just as I said, the sentence— as you had transcribed it— is incomplete: That reigning party no longer touches on its favourite subject, the display of those horrours, that must attend the existence of a power, which such dispositions and principles, seated in the heart of Europe... "Which such dispositions and principles do what?" I wondered. I see— do you?— that one word was mistranscribed: Burke did complete his sentence indeed; as it reads at Wikipedia it is not complete.--Wetman (talk) 05:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I would wish that you would use the actual definition of "complete", as a parenthetical clause inside of a sentence does not make a sentence incomplete in any definition of the word. As such, I was looking at the end of the sentence and not the parentheticals within the statement. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

...and yet, I see, Ottava Rima has corrected the transcription, thus now rendering the sentence complete, as Burke wrote it: That reigning party no longer touches on its favourite subject, the display of those horrours, that must attend the existence of a power, with such dispositions and principles, seated in the heart of Europe. There is no doubt at this end about what makes a complete sentence: Ottava Rima was confused by the sequence of clauses in apposition perhaps, as there is no parenthetical clause. --Wetman (talk) 15:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The clause is blatantly parenthetical. Wetman, stop it right now. You could have easily looked up the sentence yourself and fixed it instead of acting snarky and rude. You messed up with your choice of terms while treating another like a jerk. That shows poorly on you. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

What is the matter with you, Ottava Rima, that your every encounter with every editor is an occasion for an unappealing display of your personality. If I could have parsed the tangle you made, "as such"— as you're so fond of inserting— I'd have done so. Like many other editors, I generally avoid articles where Ottava Rima, as such, is in possession. Your manners are atrocious. --Wetman (talk) 19:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Wetman, you know that taunting someone and then claiming that they have a problem is not accepted behavior, right? And parse tangle? That is just code for "I couldn't bother to look it up even though it is a quote and would be easy to check" or "I looked it up and decided to pull this stunt anyway". Two possibilities and both definitely show that you are acting highly inappropriately. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)#Dispute over single articles having multiple infoboxes - VOTE!!!

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)#Dispute over single articles having multiple infoboxes - VOTE!!!. Thank you. Sswonk (talk) 19:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

By all means, delete this thread if not concerned, just an FYI. Sswonk (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

J. L. Mott Iron Works

Thanks for your work on this! I started it because they produced some of the many statues of The Boy with the Leaking Boot (as featured on DYK earlier today), and it's a pleasure to see the article expanded. I'm going to try and sort out the article on Jordan L. Mott too, but confusion between father and son seems abundant. PamD (talk) 13:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I added a couple of images and left one on the talk page. Do with them as you wish. - Josette (talk) 15:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I feel like PamD, that it's always rewarding to start an article and see it grow organically. The images look good just as you have done them, Josette.--Wetman (talk) 18:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

New York Times

Do you know how one might get access to the New York Times archives, without signing up for a paid subscription? Example: I am interested in an obit on Conrad Hubert of 18 March 1928 (Sunday, p. 25) to supplement the article I started a few days ago.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I've pulled it up under the headline "Conrad Hubert, 70, died in France" as a pdf file but I can't transfer it. I've incorporated its details into the article. Try googling the headline for Time Magazine squib and other stuff. The New York Times obituary, for Sunday 18 March 1928 gives the date of his death "on Wednesday", which would have been the 14th: I didn't change that, however.--Wetman (talk) 21:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for entering in the additional information and the tweaks. Yes, the 14th is correct per Who Was Who in America reference, p. 678 as it sits right here in front of me on my desk. Nothing gets past you. Just happen to have obtained a copy of his short bio from my local library the other day. Interesting is that on Misell's patent 617,592 Hubert happens to be a witness. Misell, a British subject, was working for Hubert at the time of the patent. The assignee company of the patent was owned by Hubert and eventually became Ever Ready. Misell happens to have several electrical device patents, most closely related to this flashlight idea. Trying to get information on David Misell to write up an article on him, however can not find anything. New York Public Library so far has not been able to find anything and my contact at the Library of Congress so far has not been able to find anything either. I think he was born in London. Perhaps the Bodleian Library might have biography information. Thanks for the idea. You get me thinking every time.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Viola d'arco, alas

Thank you Wetman -- and it is very funny you should point that out, for that was exactly the one nagging problem I had as I began to write the article. What exactly was this instrument, mentioned in Grove but not in Einstein, and which, as named, had only a total of two occurrences in the entire online database of the great music encyclopedia? This is where it makes me crazy I don't have access to JSTOR at home. Dalla Viola gets mentions everywhere as a great instrumentalist, but the primary researchers don't list what he played! Next time I'm at the library I shall try to figure it out. All the best, Antandrus (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Gulp, I've got JSTOR open in another folder as I write this, but having googled "viola d'arco", I'm too incompetent to edit in material from Kathleen Moretto Spencer and Howard Mayer Brown, "How Alfonso della Viola Tuned His Viols, and How He Transposed", Early Music 14.4 (November, 1986), pp. 521-533, where the term is mentioned. There are other hits, too.--Wetman (talk) 19:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

The Seven Lamps of Architecture

I found a rare (these days) redlink. Would you care to take a glance over it, my sources, save a last pass from Malgrave tomorrow are now exhausted? --Joopercoopers (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I inserted a commented-out biblio. ref. to the best article on Seven Lamps. And a paragraph with quotes.

Many thanks for your help there Mr Wetman. I must confess I'd never heard of the transcendentalists - only of Thoreau of course, what an interesting time. Modern architectural education is really lacking I think, we zoomed through 5000 years of history in about 6 months to arrive at 1919 with the Bauhaus with barely a nod to the interim. Our prof was a bit of a Victorian specialist so we did linger a little on the 19th century - but not enough for my liking now it seems. Its important I think, particularly as we have so many extant buildings from the period which we're expected to work on. --Joopercoopers (talk) 16:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I received the following notification - I'd asked them to credit you too, but it seems 'bots' don't do requests......or think......or social niceties. --Joopercoopers (talk) 16:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

On July 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Seven Lamps of Architecture, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Era-style in "Temple of Artemis"

Regarding the era-style used in Temple of Artemis, Wikipedia's Manual of Style makes clear that this article, having been begun in BC/AD era-style and still using that style mainly, should consistently keep to that style. Please see particularly, within Wikipedia:Manual of Style, "1.1 Internal consistency", "1.2 Stability of articles", and "10.4 Longer periods".
-- Lonewolf BC (talk) 06:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Looking into the article history I now see that in 2002 it began by using the BC/AD convention. My error. Only the coarsest vulgarian would attempt to force a change, one way or the other, I'm sure you'll agree. Personally, I like to insert a commented-out note <!-- This article has used the BC/AD convention since its inception --> at the head of the html text, to prevent such time-wasting confusions. I find that thoughtless editors delete that from the html, however.--Wetman (talk) 06:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Categories: Historical sources on Alexander the Great

Hi ,would you comment on the Categories for discussion ? thanks a lot Catalographer (talk) 17:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

A Category is useful to the reader only as an index to related articles: by multiplying indices, by breaking them down into the smallest possible category, they are rendered inutile. As utility is the essence of a reader's guide, such as Wikipedia, categories have little to draw me.--Wetman (talk) 18:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Here is the start of the article Sources on Alexander the Great Catalographer (talk) 07:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Mundat etymology

How sure are you about the etymology? I have seen many different claimed etymologies, and this one doesn't look more convincing to me than most of the others. I thought the most accepted was that it's a cognate of immunity (German immunität, some Latin-based languages immunitat or emunitat). That seems to contradict your explanation unless immunity and mandate are cognates. Wouldn't that imply that the Latin words mandare and munis are cognates? Are they? If I had to decide between the two I would certainly prefer immunity, because the a <-> u connection in Latin seems very odd to me.

The formulation of your two footnotes suggests to me that you misunderstood the sources. Your first source seems to say it's related to mandat d'amener, your second source that it's from immunitas. The obvious way to reconcile the two sources is to interpret the first as saying that amener (a likely cognate of immunitas, I would say) is the cognate of Mundat, not mandat.

For the moment I have changed your explanation. I would appreciate it if you could convince me that this wasn't a misunderstanding or original research, or if it was the latter, that you are an expert. Hans Adler 07:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I see that I have been misinformed: the connection is indeed, as you say, with emunitas, which Jacques Baquol and Paul Ristelhuber, in L'Alsace ancienne et moderne, ou Dictionnaire topographique, historique et statistique du Haut et du Bas-Rhin (1865) quote, as if from a charter. I have emended the footnotes, with your permission.--Wetman (talk) 08:21, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I am still a bit worried that the etymology takes an undue amount of space in the lead and is written in a somewhat inaccessible style. I would prefer to have only a very short summary in the lead, and the details further down, if you don't mind. How about something like "Mundat (probably related to immunity) is not a normal word in modern German or French."

By the way, "dans le Haute-Alsace" is ungrammatical and Google Books doesn't give me access to your source. (No 1923 rule in Europe.) It's a bit embarrassing to have WP as one of only 10 Google hits for this phrase, could you please change this to whatever the source says or add a "sic"? Hans Adler 08:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Googlebooks reassures me that I made no error in transcribing the phrase by Béatrice Weis that Hans Adler finds embarrassing. Rather than the pretentious "[sic]", which draws attention to the superior editor, I prefer simply to insert in the html <!-- dans le Haute-Alsace in original -->, which serves to keep RandyinBoise and the like at bay without public affectation. I've further streamlined this brief reference to Mundat/emunitas in the opening. I thought it unnecessary to add [sic] after emunitas.--Wetman (talk) 17:34, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Stanford Memorial Church

I have been asked to take a look at this - what are these things called in English [4] "transept balconies" I can only translate as "gallery of the clerestory", but I am sure there is a better word - any ideas? Giano (talk) 22:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd think that you're right, but without a photo of the transepts I can't tell. It looks to me like a well-detailed, well-referenced article. Googling images I see that the organ is in its loft against the west end and that there is no triforium passage down the nave. Oh! No, here I can see that the transepts are all but filled with deep balconies with swept front balustrades echoing the curves of the crossing dome, its low ring and its semi-circular arches. Very nice ensemble. --Wetman (talk) 22:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but what are they called? I have a feeling it to do with the theatre, or is at least in French churches, perhaps I am going prematurely senile, hardly surprising considering what one has to contend with here! Anyway, it is a good page, we need to lose "Jesus' outstretched arms" and such like, I don't care for all this happy clappy nonsense, if God wanted that he would have made seals Christians and us clapping at the North Pole. Giano (talk) 23:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

If they were intended for antiphonal choirs, they might be "choir lofts" but I suspect the seating is raked: is it? Proud Moms & Dads? Agnostics? Lepers?--Wetman (talk) 23:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd plump for galleries. Curl generally gives them as passageways in churches, but also as "mezzanines at the end of a large hall or room for access between rooms or to accommodate musicians etc." and "upper level of seating in a theatre" it's not quite on the money, but closer than balcony perhaps? --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, Pevsner gives gallery as "in church architecture upper storey above an aisle, opened in arches to the nave. Also called Tribune and often erroneously as Triforium". Not quite from the Aisle to the Nave as they're in the transepts, but this is getting closer I think. --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if an article that had a few plans, sections and elevations of cathedrals, chapels etc. which you could click and get a glossary definition of would be a good addition to WP? (anatomy of the church) perhaps a bit like this, but with more detail--Joopercoopers (talk) 12:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you are correct, think of the term "press gallery" and so on. Giano (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

If I have this right, Gail Stockholm in Stanford Memorial Church: An Appreciative Guide For the Not-causual Visitor, Stanford University 1980, refers to them as the "transcript galleries." Carptrash (talk) 13:49, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Galleries does seem right, but— these things slip past print editors too— surely "transcript" was a slip for transept.--Wetman (talk) 18:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Definitely. Unless parishoners are very studiously noting the sermons......well maybe....it is Stanford. --Joopercoopers (talk) 18:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Finally found a decent picture of them [5] (sorry Wetman, you're reception has become a coffee house again). --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Transept indeed. I've been doing too much non-architecture stuff recently. Bad habit. Carptrash (talk) 15:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

A slip that's worth a chuckle is well slipped, Carptrash. Joopercooper's image from flickr is very desirable for the article: whenever I make a transfer from flickr our police cadets sic their bot on me.--Wetman (talk) 18:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

How do you do the copyright thing with flickr? Just email the person and work out a deal? Some folks there are very fussy about their copyrights but most just like their work to be seen. I've not tried wikiing other's work from there. Carptrash (talk) 20:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

For Flicker copyright and wiki uploads I'm incompetent to offer advice. Can any of you lurkers make a useful suggestion?--Wetman (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Now here is one I have an answer for since I would be called a Flickerer. Now don't flicker me off, but this is how I do it. The results are that 75% will do as asked, which gives you some million plus more pictures than to use based on those that have now "All Rights Reserved" tagged. Send this form letter by Flicker email:

“ I write articles for Wikipedia. Your picture is interesting and would fit into one or more of the articles I am presently writing on.

(here insert URL link to their picture you want downgraded so they know which one) There is at least one tag in use that makes your picture not usable on Wikipedia. Would you consider downgrading your copyright tags to ONLY "Attribution License" -or- "Attribution-ShareAlike License" so I could use it on some Wikipedia articles. Do you have any other similar pictures? Thanks for your consideration. (Your Flicker name, of course after you signed up for the free account)

”

I use these pictures in my articles all the time, which greatly enhances the article. Check out my 150 DYKs on my User Page and additional ones on my Talk Page. Many of those pictures came from Flickr using the form letter. Click on picture to see. Example: Blue Ridge Parkway tunnels are all Flickr pictures.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Doug. I'm already at flickr (more than you probably want to know about me here http://www.flickr.com/photos/60188803@N00/ ) and will look around with wikipedia in mind a bit more. Your template letters seem as if they would do the job most of the time. Carptrash (talk) 00:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll bet I have uploaded more pictures to Flickr than you.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22738816@N07/

Some interesting recent uploads are from Dollywood. Check out movies MOV08807 and MOV08812 and MOV08804.

Glad I could help. It works for me. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Johann von Klenau

Thanks. I don't mind touch ups to pages. I'm glad someone notices! However, I'm going to remove the causeway reference with respect to the combat of La Favorita. It's actually a villa or a palazzo. See the Boycott-Brown book, an excellent source. You can see La Favorita on Google Earth. Start at the dot of the Citadella suburb of Mantova and go NE 1.75 km. It sits in a field. Djmaschek (talk) 02:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

This Villa La Favorita, sometimes called the "Palazzo La Favorita", is associated with the battle. There seem to have been two military encounters. Sorry about the causeway: now I can't call up the source that mentioned a causeway. --Wetman (talk) 06:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Alice

I too am uncomfortable with calling the Alice books "novels", but that's what Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and all the other articles linked to in Template:Alice (as well as the template itself) seem to do. Maybe one of us should pursue this matter at the appropriate talk pages? :-) Shreevatsa (talk) 04:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

"That sounds rather like an invitation to experience Alice in Wonderland", Wetman replied after a moment. "At Wikipedia might not one be told that The Fellowship of the Ring is a novel?" --Wetman (talk) 05:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Serapio

Could you give me any input, if you have ideas on this Serapio?

Never heard of this dude with the fancy names. "Sacrificial victims" had to be ritually acceptable in ways of which the details are obscure to me.--Wetman (talk) 22:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I also never heard of him, however he became part of Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio's name. Apparently frankincense was used in public sacrifices. Thanks for answering my questions at the Reference Desk.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

The warehouse man at the Roman end of the Incense Route! I hadn't thought of that.--Wetman (talk) 18:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Bingo! --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

...no victims with frankincense, of course.--Wetman (talk) 20:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course! In Plutarch's Lives of the life of Tiberius Gracchus he writes where Tiberius negotiates with the Numantines and accepts nothing ...but some frankincense, which he used in his public sacrifices... Type in Find the word "frankincense" here at Plutarch's life of Tiberius Gracchus. Is this then just a burial ceremony he is talking about that Tiberius would perform from time to time; the reason why he wanted frankincense? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

No, not specifically a burial: frankincense was the most general incense offered a deity on every minor occasion: the Aesopic fable The Crow and Mercury commences "A Crow caught in a snare prayed to Apollo to release him, making a vow to offer some frankincense at his shrine..."--Wetman (talk) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

O.K., now I get it. Thanks!--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Ancient sources

Do you know of some excellent English translation websites for Livy (From the Founding of the City) and Polybius (The Histories) where they would be searchable. I am interested in biographical information of Scipio Aemilianus Africanus, associated with the Third Punic War (more than Wikipedia has). Plutarch does not seem to have a specific "Life" on him, however there are some references of him in other Lives.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say that I don't know how to apply a "Search" feature to the on-line English translations.--Wetman (talk) 18:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Found a couple of ways around it then. 1) Look in each chapter here or 2) download from Project Gutenberg the books onto my harddrive, then search.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:03, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Roman History, Books I-III

The History of Rome, Books 09 to 26

The History of Rome, Books 27 to 36

Livius.org: Livy

Medusa

Hey Wetman, I think you were fooled by the automatic edit summary here. It looks like the IP was trying to help. --Bongwarrior (talk) 19:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. How embarrassing. It goes to show that old men like me shouldn't be left alone with computers.--Wetman (talk) 19:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Walter Horn

Thanks for correcting an error of the sort I dread to make (Saint Gilles). Odd that you should notice the article so promptly, because I almost asked you to look at it. First, because I felt I was doing it in haste and without focus, to get it off my plate; and second, because footnote 6 made me nervous and I wondered whether you thought it would only attract arguments … of the sort I dread. I also laughed at what you said about the links, as at one point I was thinking to myself (I swear this is the truth), "you must do something about this addiction to linking." Cynwolfe (talk) 22:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I lurk at the bot depot User:AlexNewArtBot/GoodSearchResult‎ like a trout below rapids, ready to snap at anything promising that washes down. Highly recommended when one temporarily runs out of redlinks. The "Spear of Destiny" does attract the Wrong Sort.--Wetman (talk) 22:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Middleton Place – reference

Wetman:

On the Middleton Place article, you cited someone named "Tanner." Can you give me the title of this book or article? Bms4880 (talk) 18:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I've tried googling it, and JSTOR, and I can't call up "Tanner 1984" yet. Hold on! here it is!--Wetman (talk) 20:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Maiden Castle, Dorset

Hi, thanks for your tweaks to the article. I was wondering if you have a reference for Hardy's house being within view of the castle? It sounds vaguely familiar and I know he lived somewhere close-by but I don't know of a source so help would be appreciated. Nev1 (talk) 01:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

The house, "Max Gate", is mentioned in Ralph Pite, Thomas Hardy: the guarded life p. 267f: "Maiden Castle, an Iron Age fort visible from Max Gate". Also mentioned in Hardy's first magazine interview, 1886 (Pite p. 268) --Wetman (talk) 01:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I've added the reference to the article. Nev1 (talk) 01:58, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

That's a distinguished article.--Wetman (talk) 02:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

My only regret about the article is not getting some more impressive photos; ground level doesn't really do the site justice. In 2010 some aerial photos from the 1930s excavations will come into the public domain and something like the second image down in this article would have been nice. It would have looked great on the main page, but unfortunately I didn't realise the article was slated to be TFA until it was moved protected and already on the main page! Ah well, my target was to get it onto the main page as I think it's an interesting subject, so mission accomplished. Nev1 (talk) 02:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

My reservation about the first image "Rampart and ditch at Maiden Castle" is that it conveys no sense of scale. I haven't the patience to follow the process of approving "FA"s, even from a great distance. --Wetman (talk) 02:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nicolas-Joseph Thiéry de Menonville

Hello! Your submission of Nicolas-Joseph Thiéry de Menonville at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dabomb87 (talk) 21:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Lindow Man

Hi again, it was I while ago you made the edit, but I've reverted this edit as, according to Dougweller (talk · contribs), it's a fringe theory. It is reported in The Times so may be worth a mention, but I'm unsure. WP:FRINGE says such theories shouldn't be given too much weight, but I didn't think it was. I'm thinking that if it was to be mentioned, the theory would have to be explained (with any notable rebuttals) as would the other theories. Nev1 (talk) 01:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Grigsby's reference to a "sacrificial king" is much preferable. Thanks.--Wetman (talk) 02:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Nicolas-Joseph Thiéry de Menonville

On August 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nicolas-Joseph Thiéry de Menonville, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

WP:DYK 20:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

castro

Castro is just a derived latin word from "Castle". Castro culture is a specific civilization between the Douro river and southern Galicia, with specific cultural traits, although can be found in northern Galician and over the Douro river. it is more or less the same thing as the Callaecian peoples. Archeologists just saw the archeological remains of villages and towns, called castros, in the area had strong semilarities, so they named it "castro culture". I've read books about it to create the article about the castro city in here, sometime ago. So i know. -Pedro (talk) 21:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. All that I know too. I actually made some early edits at Castro culture. I just thought you'd check the text at Castro Verde ("Green Castle" eh) which makes a (legitimate? not legitimate?) connection to Castro culture that existed so far to the north. --Wetman (talk) 21:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

there is a huge number of castro settlements in this region, much more than anywhere else. so that's why they choose the name "castro", which is a word like cividade that reached us by the common people (they knew these places by these names) and there are people with "castro" surname, that can be also a clue for their origin. Most without any archaeological study, some were not even villages, but defensive outposts for the cities. Unfortunately this culture is not very studied, so it is normal that people make a confusion out of it. they see something with a similar name, they think it is the same. -Pedro (talk) 23:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

...no doubt they do, but that won't be good enough for the Wikipedia reader: there's no connection between Castro culture and the town of Castro Verde, so I'll just remove the link.--Wetman (talk) 10:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The Roman Colonna and a Tyrolean castle

Coat of arms of Leonhard von Völs (aka Leonhard Colonna, barone di Fiè) in Schloss Prösels, South Tyrol.

Having copy-edited a very early version of Prösels Castle, and remembering the link to the Colonna, I was not at all surprised to see your edit to the family article. Obviously the ethnic cleansers who creep over Wikipedia’s South Tyrolean articles had been at work. It is so tedious. Anyway you can see the Colonna column in a sixteenth-century fresco from the castle right. Ian Spackman (talk) 15:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, much better now that you've actually mentioned the Colonna in the caption. The armorial reference alone was too subtle for me--Wetman (talk) 19:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I later tracked down and restored the suppressed paragraph of text which attempts to explain the links. (I suspect that the only armorial reference I would ever be likely to spot would be if the Colonna were to hitch up with the Colleoni.) Ian Spackman (talk) 09:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merge

If you want to propose a merge, you need to put banners on all articles affected, with a link to 1 discussion. --Philcha (talk) 06:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes of course. But I did: Halofolliculina corallasia and Skeletal Eroding Band.--Wetman (talk) 07:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Central discussion! Read the proc. --Philcha (talk) 18:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't using templates {{merge}} amd {{mergefrom}} have automatically centralized the discussion? Didn't it used to? I understand now anyway that merging the two articles doesn't make sense.--Wetman (talk) 21:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

If you now oppose the merger, please say so at Talk:Halofolliculina corallasia. Then we can put this to bed in a week. --Philcha (talk) 22:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I see you've put this to bed. That's the trouble with taking my watchlist in chrono order. Thanks! --Philcha (talk) 22:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Horns of Consecration

Thank you for putting together the excellent article on the horns of consecration! Was so happy to see you're still contributing to the Minoan article-writing effort :> k. da-ma-te (talk) 08:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

04:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

"Part of a string of self-promotions inserted by Mark Chandos: see Special:Contributions/Snizhana for list.--Wetman (talk) 04:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)"--Snizhana (talk) 16:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Wetman, I've got this message from you. Please explain me why? And tell me what to do not you to have the impression of "self-promotion" that is not true.

Thank you very much --Snizhana (talk) 16:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Article talkpage alerts aren't personal messages, but messages to alert editors in general: see Special:Contributions/Snizhana for list of self-promotions.--Wetman (talk) 16:32, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

De viris illustribus

Wetman, could you take a look at my question on the talk page of De viris illustribus? I saw that you were prominent among the recent editors. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I haven't got a handle on it.--Wetman (talk) 03:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Your edit summary

Here is quite inappropriate, and also false since I haven't ever unprotected this page. Kindly refrain from singling out users in edit summaries, please, or anything to deliberately upset your fellow editors. As for my recent unprotections, they are trials and done initially to remove the latest unfriendly protection log entries from the edit window, the protections will be restored if the articles are targeted by vandalism again. There's no problem I can see here. Regards, Cenarium (talk) 02:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Though Cenarium announces that he's are "on vacation" he has found time to unprotect Odysseus, Demon, Athena, Apollo— but quite right: not Hades. I recommended at User talk:Cenarium that he keep these articles on his Watchlist, now that he's unprotected them just before the seasonal abuses connected with the public school year commence, and I requested that he do his fair share in reverting the constant vandalism that these pages are subject to, as a look through their page histories would show him. --Wetman (talk) 03:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

thumb|Original heraldic logo

Starbucks logo

Hi, saw yur edits to Sirens and thought I'd bring your attention to this which quotes multiple sources that the logo is a "siren". I accept the folks at Starbucks - and the graphic designers - are probably mistaken as to the classical depictions of sirens, melusines and mermaids et alii but it does seem to be their intention that it's siren-based (from an original Norse woodcut). Thoughts? Dick G (talk) 14:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

We don't want to transmit our confusions to the Wikipedia reader. Or those of Valerie O'Neil, Starbucks spokeswoman. Starbucks was founded in Seattle, where books of heraldry and classical myth may be rather far to seek. Or so it seems. Is the following text unclear?

Twin fishtails in the Gigantomachy in the Pergamon Altar

The sirens of Greek mythology are sometimes portrayed in later folklore as mermaid-like; the fact that in Spanish, French, Italian, Polish, Romanian or Portuguese, the word for mermaid are respectively Sirena, Sirène, Sirena, Syrena, Sirenă and Sereia, and that in biology the Sirenians comprise an order of fully aquatic mammals that includes the dugong and manatees, creates visual confusion, so that sirens are even represented as mermaids. "The sirens, though they sing to mariners, are not sea-maidens," Harrison cautions; "they dwell on an island in a flowery meadow."

Starbucks' crowned heraldic sirena holding up her two fishy tails, is a purely medieval/Early Modern mermaid whose Classical antecedents, if there are any at all, are in depictions of Typhon (see that article), or the aquatic Gigantes (see left). As for sirena, or Sirenians for that matter, the concept false cognate might help. And for the "Harrison" who's being quoted, pace Ms O'Neil, see the article Jane Ellen Harrison. As for Starbucks "siren [sic]" she's actually a heraldic melusine. For google images search " heraldic melusina ": see? --Wetman (talk) 14:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

All sounds good to me. Why couldn't they have just drawn a star and a buck? Pish! Siren remains as edited. cheers Dick G (talk) 19:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps this is all more confusing than I realise, and the articles Siren, Mermaid and Melusine need to address these issues better.--Wetman (talk) 21:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

...in attempting to clear up text concerning Starbucks' melusine logo, I seem to have stirred up undesirable quantities of Wikipedia's copious sediment (I haven't looked further into Talk:Starbucks) and have dropped Starbucks from my Watchlist.--Wetman (talk) 11:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Stefano Bardini

Hello! Your submission of Stefano Bardini at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Smartse (talk) 19:41, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Travelling Heroes

Well, I have my problems with the book (I was glad you said "the soundest ideas"!), but yes, it's an enjoyable read with lots of juicy details, and it's always fun adding that kind of thing to Wikipedia. (I'm currently reading a book on eighteenth-century German biblical scholarship, which results in my Contributions now including articles on Louis Cappel, Jean Morin (theologian), and the Paraphrases of Erasmus!) --Languagehat (talk) 12:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Oi! better you than me! But where did you think Fox went astray? I was modestly prepared in my amateurish way, with Burkert's Orientalizing Revolution and some articles at JSTOR, and it all seemed well supported in the notes. I must say he's one of my favorite gardening writers too... --Wetman (talk) 13:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's my review of the book, but I warn you, I was in a bad mood when I wrote it! (The discussion winds, as is the way with LH comment threads, down unpredictable byways and ends up in an amusing discussion of Balliol history.) --Languagehat (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. I'd have expected his synthesized history of the generic "Hipposthenes" to have been the thing you most disliked. He doesn't seem to build much upon Betyllion/Bytyllion beyond the derivation from beit-el that "confirms that Canaanite-Phoenician culture never entirely died at the site". Which seems likely enough anyway: do vet what I've added at Ras Ibn Hani when you get a flush of generosity. --Wetman (talk) 14:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you read my post on "Betyllion," but I could find no evidence that it was ever spelled thus; every edition of Malalas I could find has Bytyllion, and as far as I can tell "Betyllion" is Lane Fox's invention. If I were you I'd amend the Ras Ibn Hani article accordingly, but I'm too absorbed in copyediting the damn biblical scholarship book to deal with it myself. Sorry to be so negative; I've liked other stuff he wrote, which is why I preordered the book, and my disappointment was correspondingly acute. --Languagehat (talk) 15:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I did indeed and modified what I'd written at Ras Ibn Hani accordingly, without going into critical original research, just reporting.--Wetman (talk) 16:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

This is a tenet of Wikipedianism that I will never understand. You feel comfortable quoting Lane Fox, even though he's demonstrably wrong, because he's a Printed Source. When you say "who identified the site as the harbor later Greeks knew as Betyllion," you're implying that he is correct that later Greeks knew it by that name. My showing that the alleged spelling does not occur in Malalas is "original research" and thus does not count. I'd be happier if you deleted the entire passage; if not, when I have the time and energy I'll rewrite it to reflect the facts as known to me, though of course without citing the dreaded "original research." Wikipedia should not be a repository for every cockamamie thing anyone who's managed to get a book printed has ever said. --Languagehat (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

We're quite in agreement on this head.--Wetman (talk) 22:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Counselor

Since you are my mentor, I need some advice that has to be kept confidential. Could you e-mail me. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:43, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, Doug, I've never linked up an email address with Wikipedia. I'm sorry that anything at Wikipedia should need to be confidential. I wish that I could give you advice that would be good for everyone.--Wetman (talk) 05:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you can. Below is some text that I am not interested in having changed or modified. Just would like you (or others that may be following this) to look over and give any comments that come to mind. It might not be good English, as we know it today, however I do believe you can get the jest of the short biography on Appius Claudius. The sources where the information came from originally is Livy and Plutarch. No need to Google as you won't find this text there. I understand Appius Claudius is associated with the first Roman aqueduct.

Homily 9 - Appius Claudius

Click show in right corner to display.

A ditch, yet planned in designing and digging for the leaders of the Roman Republic, came to the senators,

desiring of them proposals to an aqueduct for the organized group of people of self supporters, that if they found any way, whether he be a man or woman, they might bring it bound to vision of peace.

As they progressed from one stage to another, they came near the idea of an aqueduct. Eventually there shined round about them a light from happiness.

The people went to the ground and saw a vision saying to them, "Ditch, ditch, why do you pursue me?"

They responded, "Who are you, ruler?" The Roman Republic responded, "I am self dependence, whom you pursue. It is hard for you to go against the society’s needs."

They composed and full of surprise said, "Ruler, what will you have us to do?" The Roman Republic said to them, "Rise, and go into the city, and it shall be told to you what you must do."

The men whom progressed from one stage to another with them spoke out, speaking their voice, and listening to many people.

A ditch went down into the earth. When their eyes were opened, they heard one man. He led them by the hand, and brought them into an aqueduct.

He was three times consul with sight (312 BC, 307 BC, 296 BC). Both eyes saw well.

There was a certain leader at an aqueduct, named cloud of the ruler. To him said the Roman Republic in a vision, cloud of the ruler. He said, "Observe, I am here, ruler."

The Roman Republic said to him, "Rise and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the manner of the praise of self dependence for one called a ditch of Tarentum. For look it pleads

and has seen in a vision a man named cloud of the ruler coming in and putting his hand on it, that it might receive his inspirations."

Then cloud of the ruler answered, "Ruler, I have heard by many of this project, how much evil it has done to your senators at vision of peace.

Here it has authority from the senators to bind all that call on your name."

The Roman Republic said to it, "Go your way. For it is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of who prevails with good life experiences.

For I will show it how great things it must suffer for my name's sake."

The Roman Republic went its way and entered into the matters. Putting their hands on it said, "Brother ditch, the Roman Republic, even self dependence, that appeared unto you in the way as you came, has sent me, that you might receive your insight, and be filled with a sense common to most people."

Immediately there came to it an insight, as it had been blurry. It received inspiration immediately and was risen to commitment.

When it had received appropriation of funds, it was strengthened. Then was the ditch certain times with the leaders which were at an aqueduct.

Right away it taught the formally selected method in the organized group of people that were self dependent, that it was the result of good moral life experiences.

All that heard about it were astonished and said; "Is not this it that destroyed them which called on this name in vision of peace, and came here for that intent, that it might bring them bound unto the senators?"

The ditch increased more in strength and proved to the people that believed in self reliance, which were working at an aqueduct, proving that this was very much the correct way to go.

After that some time had elapsed the self thinking people that believed in self reliance took counsel to give the military road project life.

Its expectation was known of the road project. They watched the gates day and night to give life to it.

Then the leaders took it eventually and built it up with retaining walls.

When the ditch came to vision of peace, it analyzed to join itself to the leaders. The people were not afraid of the military road project and believed that it was a need.

The son of consolation took it and brought it to the military commanders and declared to them how he had seen the Roman Republic leading the way. That it had spoken to him and how he had taught boldly about the aqueduct in the name of self dependence.

He was with them going out and coming into vision of peace.

He spoke boldly in the name of the Roman Republic being self dependent and worked with the artisans. They went about to give life to the military road project.

Which then the people knew he took them up to Roman control and brought it forth to Tarentum.

Then had the organized groups of people worked throughout all Etruria and the district of Samnium and were instructed spiritually and morally, whom were running in the fear of the Roman Republic and in the comfort of common sense were brought together. Eventually the one considered "the foundation" military road went through certain parts. It went up also to the senators which controlled the money needed for the project.

There they found a certain man called Appius Claudius, which had kept their bed eight years (312 BC - 304 BC) and was not afraid to step forward to expedite the project.

The one considered "the foundation" said to him, "Appius, self reliance as the way to go makes you whole. Rise, and make your bed." He did rise to the occasion immediately.

All that resided at the pool of resources including the grasslands of the Campanian plains saw the Samnite warrior-herdsmen invading the lands for their animals and turned to the Roman Republic.

Now there was at Rome a certain leader named Publius Decius. This man was full of good works and deeds of helping the poor, which he did.

It came to pass in those times, that he was sick, and about to die. Which when he had washed his hands of dictatorship, he put Caius Junius Bubulcus in as the great leader.

In view of the fact that as a pool of resources was near to Rome, and the leaders had heard that the one called "the dictator" was there, they sent to him two men (Appius Claudius and Caius Plautius), desiring them that they would not delay to go to him.

When the title called "the dictator" had risen it went to Bubulcus. When it came and he brought it to a lower political level. All the single young men stood by him preparing and showing the coats and garments which Decius made while Bubulcus was with him.

The title called "the dictator" put them all aside and sat down and hoped for the best. Turning them to the body of the Roman army said, "Publius Decius, rise." Bubulcus then closed his eyes. When Bubulcus saw the title called "the dictator" he sat down.

Decius gave his position to Bubulcus and he let him down. When he had enlisted the single young men he had not presented them to duty.

It was known throughout all Rome. Many believed in the Roman Republic.

It came to pass that Decius resided many times in Rome as Master of the Horse.

Appius Claudius

(time period from about 340 BC to 273 BC) (decoding process using the keys off KJV)

1And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,

A ditch, yet planned in designing and digging for the leaders of the Roman Republic, came to the senators,

2And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.

desiring of them proposals to an aqueduct for the organized group of people of self supporters, that if they found any way, whether he be a man or woman, they might bring it bound to vision of peace.

3And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

As they progressed from one stage to another, they came near the idea of an aqueduct. Eventually there shined round about them a light from happiness.

4And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

The people went to the ground and saw a vision saying to them, "Ditch, ditch, why do you pursue me?"

5And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

They responded, "Who are you, ruler?" The Roman Republic responded, "I am self dependence, whom you pursue. It is hard for you to go against the society’s needs."

6And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

They composed and full of surprise said, "Ruler, what will you have us to do?" The Roman Republic said to them, "Rise, and go into the city, and it shall be told to you what you must do."

7And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

The men whom progressed from one stage to another with them spoke out, speaking their voice, and listening to many people.

8And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

A ditch went down into the earth. When their eyes were opened, they heard one man. He led them by the hand, and brought them into an aqueduct.

9And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.

He was three times consul with sight (312 BC, 307 BC, 296 BC). Both eyes saw well.

10And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.

There was a certain leader at an aqueduct, named cloud of the ruler. To him said the Roman Republic in a vision, cloud of the ruler. He said, "Observe, I am here, ruler."

11And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,

The Roman Republic said to him, "Rise and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the manner of the praise of self dependence for one called a ditch of Tarentum. For look it pleads

12And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.

and has seen in a vision a man named cloud of the ruler coming in and putting his hand on it, that it might receive his inspirations."

13Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:

Then cloud of the ruler answered, "Ruler, I have heard by many of this project, how much evil it has done to your senators at vision of peace.

14And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.

Here it has authority from the senators to bind all that call on your name."

15But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

The Roman Republic said to it, "Go your way. For it is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of who prevails with good life experiences.

16For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.

For I will show it how great things it must suffer for my name's sake."

17And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

The Roman Republic went its way and entered into the matters. Putting their hands on it said, "Brother ditch, the Roman Republic, even self dependence, that appeared unto you in the way as you came, has sent me, that you might receive your insight, and be filled with a sense common to most people."

18And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Immediately there came to it an insight, as it had been blurry. It received inspiration immediately and was risen to commitment.

19And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

When it had received appropriation of funds, it was strengthened. Then was the ditch certain times with the leaders which were at an aqueduct.

20And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

Right away it taught the formally selected method in the organized group of people that were self dependent, that it was the result of good moral life experiences.

21But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?

All that heard about it were astonished and said; "Is not this it that destroyed them which called on this name in vision of peace, and came here for that intent, that it might bring them bound unto the senators?"

22But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.

The ditch increased more in strength and proved to the people that believed in self reliance, which were working at an aqueduct, proving that this was very much the correct way to go.

23And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him:

After that some time had elapsed the self thinking people that believed in self reliance took counsel to give the military road project life.

24But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him.

Its expectation was known of the road project. They watched the gates day and night to give life to it.

25Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket.

Then the leaders took it eventually and built it up with retaining walls.

26And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.

When the ditch came to vision of peace, it analyzed to join itself to the leaders. The people were not afraid of the military road project and believed that it was a need.

27But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus.

The son of consolation took it and brought it to the military commanders and declared to them how he had seen the Roman Republic leading the way. That it had spoken to him and how he had taught boldly about the aqueduct in the name of self dependence.

28And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.

He was with them going out and coming into vision of peace.

29And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him.

He spoke boldly in the name of the Roman Republic being self dependent and worked with the artisans. They went about to give life to the military road project.

30Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus.

Which then the people knew he took them up to Roman control and brought it forth to Tarentum.

31Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.

Then had the organized groups of people worked throughout all Etruria and the district of Samnium and were instructed spiritually and morally, whom were running in the fear of the Roman Republic and in the comfort of common sense were brought together.

32And it came to pass, as Peter passed throughout all quarters, he came down also to the saints which dwelt at Lydda.

Eventually the one considered "the foundation" military road went through certain parts. It went up also to the senators which controlled the money needed for the project.

33And there he found a certain man named Aeneas, which had kept his bed eight years, and was sick of the palsy.

There they found a certain man called Appius Claudius, which had kept their bed eight years (312 BC - 304 BC) and was not afraid to step forward to expedite the project.

34And Peter said unto him, Aeneas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole: arise, and make thy bed. And he arose immediately.

The one considered "the foundation" said to him, "Appius, self reliance as the way to go makes you whole. Rise, and make your bed." He did rise to the occasion immediately.

35And all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron saw him, and turned to the Lord.

All that resided at the pool of resources including the grasslands of the Campanian plains saw the Samnite warrior-herdsmen invading the lands for their animals and turned to the Roman Republic.

36Now there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas: this woman was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did.

Now there was at Rome a certain leader named Publius Decius. This man was full of good works and deeds of helping the poor, which he did.

37And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid her in an upper chamber.

It came to pass in those times, that he was sick, and about to die. Which when he had washed his hands of dictatorship, he put Caius Junius Bubulcus in as the great leader.

38And forasmuch as Lydda was nigh to Joppa, and the disciples had heard that Peter was there, they sent unto him two men, desiring him that he would not delay to come to them.

In view of the fact that as a pool of resources was near to Rome, and the leaders had heard that the one called "the dictator" was there, they sent to him two men (Appius Claudius and Caius Plautius), desiring them that they would not delay to go to him.

39Then Peter arose and went with them. When he was come, they brought him into the upper chamber: and all the widows stood by him weeping, and shewing the coats and garments which Dorcas made, while she was with them.

When the title called "the dictator" had risen it went to Bubulcus. When it came and he brought it to a lower political level. All the single young men stood by him preparing and showing the coats and garments which Decius made while Bubulcus was with him.

40But Peter put them all forth, and kneeled down, and prayed; and turning him to the body said, Tabitha, arise. And she opened her eyes: and when she saw Peter, she sat up.

The title called "the dictator" put them all aside and sat down and hoped for the best. :Turning them to the body of the Roman army said, "Publius Decius, rise." Bubulcus then closed his eyes. When Bubulcus saw the title called "the dictator" he sat down.

41And he gave her his hand, and lifted her up, and when he had called the saints and widows, presented her alive.

Decius gave his position to Bubulcus and he let him down. When he had enlisted the single young men he had not presented them to duty.

42And it was known throughout all Joppa; and many believed in the Lord.

It was known throughout all Rome. Many believed in the Roman Republic.

43And it came to pass, that he tarried many days in Joppa with one Simon a tanner.

It came to pass that Decius resided many times in Rome as Master of the Horse.

Above Homily 9 - Appius Claudius Caecus can be found in Plutarch's Lives. (Appius Claudius, pp. 673, 675, 677; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323) AND Livy "The History of Rome" books ix.29; xxvii.23,xxxi.1, xxxii.35, xxxiii.36, 43, 44, xxxiv.10, 17, 28, 51, xxxvi.10, 13, 22,30 --Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The only real question I would like you to answer is what would you consider the main feature of the Appian Way? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:58, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

The most historic feature was that it was the first of the military lifelines that held the Roman world together. The main features today are the tombs along it. What is the text with the literal translation above?--Wetman (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I must agree with you of that of the "first of the military lifelines that held the Roman world together." This was for the movement of troops. What instigated this was the Second Samnite War and because of the construction of this "Straight Street" the losing war changed in favor of the Romans because they were able to move troops and supplies quickly down this straight street (with an occasional turn here and there). I appreciate your answers and must agree with you. On your question of "the text with the literal translation" I would like to hold off for now - however I promise I will ultimately give you the answer to your question. Give me awhile (I'm am old retiree and move slow) and I will get back to you later on this. Bye for now. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 00:07, 3 September 2009 (UTC) P.S. The second half came originally from Livy book ix (29) as the reference source that the medieval writer used.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 00:13, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Meanwhile perhaps you can tell me the total number of books in the bible (Old Testament + New Testament). --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

That depends on how you divide Kings etc and whether you include 3 Daniel etc. Don't you just tot them up in the table of contents? --Wetman (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I come up with 39 books for the Old Testament and 27 for the New Testament, which seems to be the consensus in the articles.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe we both can agree that the number 66 has significance in that in many cases, many (while not all) would agree there are 66 books to the Christian bible. The article on the New Testament says, ...the majority have settled on the same twenty-seven book canon... and the article on the Old Testament says, ...The Old Testament in the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Greek Orthodox Bibles have 39 books in common. I understand that some will feel differently on this, however from a non-technical viewpoint many seem to go with this information since it appears in the articles. Being such an important item, by now something different would have come up IF many felt differently. So, bottomline, the number 66 has significance - would you not agree? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Please bear me on these questions and you will see later the significance. These points are quite important and not just random points. Its something I have been working on for years and need help with. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The collection of books we call the Bible is essentially a library. Thomas Jefferson's library has been recreated (not with the actual editions he owned) at the Library of Congress. Would the total number of works, or the total number of volumes (a different number), in Jefferson's library be significant? His choices would be significant. There is no significance in the total one arrives at of books of "the Bible", in part because the division into "books" has been an arbitrary one; there is significance however in the historical process by which these books, and not others, came to be considered canonical. That's an interesting story, which you might follow in Robin Lane Fox, The Unauthorized Version. --Wetman (talk) 20:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Knowing that Petrarch has many important works, what would you say is his most important work (from his viewpoint)? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

De Viris Illustribus ? I say this not knowing. Petrarch will surely have said which was his most important work in one of his letters, I should think.--Wetman (talk) 20:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps by his actions he did. The article on him says, With his first large scale work, Africa, an epic in Latin about the great Roman general Scipio Africanus, Petrarch emerged as a European celebrity. On April 8, 1341, he became the first poet laureate since antiquity and was crowned on the holy grounds of Rome's Capitol.

Petrarch also has an extensive work hardly known worldwide called Chronicle of Universal History. It is structured and consists of famous Roman military leaders much like his work of De Viris Illustribus. It is also in chronological order like this, however it covers not only famous Roman generals but Persian and Greek kings. It is much more extensive, however I don't see anything in Wikipedia on it. It has similar people like Cornelius Scipio, Alexander the Great, Cato the Elder, and Scipio Aemilianus Africanus, but also has Cyrus II the Great, Darius I, the Great, Darius III, Philip II of Macedon and Artaxerxes I Longimanus among others. While Liber I of De Viris Illustribus has 24 moral biographies, Chronicle of Universal History has 28 moral biographies. Are you familiar with it?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm not; usually I read of "his one wholly historical work, a collection of biographies of Roman statesmen and generals, one version of which was posthumously published as De viris illustribus (1379)" (quote from Benjamin G. Kohl, "Petrarch's Prefaces to de Viris Illustribus" History and Theory 1974). Universal history is a familiar medieval literary genre, usually based on Jerome, and gaining interest for us-all, once it moves into the particular continuator's own lifetime.--Wetman (talk) 21:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting you should note that Universal history is a familiar medieval literary genre, usually based on Jerome. Looking at De Viris Illustribus (Jerome) it says in his own little bio, I, Jerome, son of Eusebius, of the city of Strido, which is on the border of Dalmatia and Pannonia.... Looking at Stridon it says it was an area of unknown location. But of course we both now know where that is at. It is on the border of Dalmatia and Pannonia. How obvious! Jerome sure does have a long Latin name and some funny Greek letters. Note that Petrarch's De Viris Illustribus consists of 2 books, Liber I and Liber II. Liber I is of Roman statesmen and generals (in chronological order starting in the 8th century BC) with both Scipios, while Libre II is of biblical figures. So this then is a list of apostles with biblical names secondary, describing their actions - while I am your disciple. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:57, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Therein lies my dilemma and the main reason I am coming to you. Thanks for staying with me on this. Only you, from all the people I know, will be able to help me on this problem. First let me answer your original question as I promised I would. The text you asked about is the ninth moral biography in this series of 28. Number ten is of Cornelius Scipio. I have a seventeenth century copy and believe am the only one that knows of the existence of this manuscript. The copy I have is Early Modern English. Petrarch placed his manuscript where no thief could take. It requires special keys to get access - which I have. I don't wish the world to know where it is and hope I have obtained your interest for you to e-mail me. If you e-mail me I will tell you exactly where this special Universal History is.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:41, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting that you should happen to have mentioned that of Jerome. Looking at his Illustrius Men I see he lists "Cornelius" as number 66 - a significant number. Now here is a very easy question, and not a trick question in any way, however is important : How many letters in Carthage? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Here is homily 9 decoded showing the keys. One of the main keys used is the meaning behind the biblical names. The other main key is to use the opposite meaning of that written. There are other minor keys also that come into play. I know of most of the keys. Now it has been exposed to the world and all anyone has to do is a close inspection and apply the keys. Look at chapter 9 and you will see where it talks of the "Straight street." Chapter 10 talks of "Cornelius", an Italian commander. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 10:18, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The second half of this chapter 9 came originally directly from Livy book ix (29) as the reference source. This you can see the result of after the decoding. You know I could not make this up as it matches Livy way to close. Please take a look at the Livy source I provided to verify. Petrarch is known to have used for his ancient sources for his De Viris Illustribus and Africa that of Livy, Plutarch and Polybius. All 28 chapters after decoding show information from these sources. One of the arguments you may propose is that Petrarch did not know English, which of course I know, however some of his associates he worked closely with did. You do realize what I am implying by showing you all this material. That was the reason I wanted to keep it more or less quiet, however now it is exposed to the world to see. If I discovered this (and I am not all that intellegent) then soon others will find also - mostly I think because of the information now available on Wikipedia.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Cornelius

Click show in right corner to display.

Cornelius, overseer of Rome, to whom eight letters of Carthage still exists. On the Rome (Italy) African council was another (Scipio Cornelius Africanus). On Numidian (Syphax), and those who had fallen from the faith (sided with Carthage insteading of siding with Rome), a third (overseer). On the acts of the council (Roman Senate) was a fourth (overseer). Very extended tedious lengthy (delayed) one, to the same Fabius Maximus (known as Cunctator - the Delayer), containing the causes of the Numidian (Syphax) heresy and the items condemned of this. Lucius Aemilius Paullus ruled the Roman forces for the second consul under Gaius Terentius Varro (216 BC). Scipio Cornelius Africanus received the crown of matrimony for the formally selected one (Aemilia Tertia, daughter of Lucius Aemilius Paullus), whom was preceeded by Lucius (her father).

Cornelius bio.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Seven. Phoenicians didn't include vowels in writing. Do you mean Latin Cartago or Punic qrt hdst? That th in our Carthage is only there because we don't have Greek θ, which comes in with the Greek version of the Punic name; so one becomes "two". Doug, number magic is a a cul-de-sac: a dry road to a dead end. I'm not going to follow very far. --Wetman (talk) 22:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

All right. But in Middle English it would have had 8 letters. So, this anyway is not that important - however did you find Universal History? Hint: try this: Chronicle of universal history, 28 homilies. Keep in mind I have a 17th century copy. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Hannibal

Click show in right corner to display.

Carthaginian of Africa, at first was famous as a teacher of persuasive speaking then afterwards on the persuasion of the administrative duties of the Cornelius commander, from whom he received his surname. He became a devout believer in being an innovative ruler and gave all his substance to the poor. Not long after he was inducted into the administrative duties he was also made overseer of Carthage. It is unnecessary to make a catalogue of the works of his genius, since they are more conspicuous than the sun. He was put to death (defeated) under the dictator Fabius Maximus, in the eighth persecution, on the same time that (Scipio) Cornelius was put to death at Rome, but not in the same year. (Turns out Hannibal died in the year 183 BC, same year as Scipio. Hannibal was 64 and Scipio was 53.)

Hannibal bio. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Homily 15 - Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus

Click show in right corner to display.

Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus

(time period from about 163 BC to about 133 BC)

A certain man which went up to the praise of supporting one’s self taught the senators, and said, "Except you be surrounded after the manner of progress, you cannot be saved."

Then therefore Tiberius Gracchus and son of Cornelia Africana had no small disagreement and verbal controversy with Scipio the younger. He determined that Tiberius and certain others of them, should come down to vision of peace to the military commanders and the senior ranking about this question of progress.

Being brought on their way by the organized group of people, he entered into Lex Sempronia, declaring the conversion of the non-believers of self-supporting. The land reform laws caused great joy to all the people.

When they had come to vision of peace, he was received of the organized group of people, and of the military commanders and the senior ranking. They declared all things that good moral life experiences had done to them.

But there rose up certain of the sect of those set apart which did not believe, saying, "That it was needful to go around them, and to command them to keep the law of progress."

The military commanders and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

When there had been much disputing, Scipio Aemilianus Africanus came down, and said to them, "Men and people, you know how that a good while ago good moral life experiences made choice among us, that the non-believers in self -supporting by my mouth should hear the word of the good news and believe.

Good moral life experiences, which knows the hearts, bare them witness, giving them common sense, even as he did to us.

Put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

Now therefore why tempt your good moral life experiences, to put a yoke upon the neck of the followers, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

But we believe that through the grace of our own self dependence, the formally selected way to go, we shall be saved, even as they."

Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to the son of Cornelia Africana and Gaius Gracchus, declaring what miracles and wonders good moral life experiences had worked among the non-believers of self supporters by it.

After they had held their peace, Marcus Octavius argued, saying, "Men and brethren, hear me out.

The lieutenant has declared how good moral life experiences at first did visit the non-believers of self dependence, to take out of them a people for his name.

And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of the well-beloved, which has fallen down. I will build again the ruins thereof. I will set it up.

That the residue of men might seek after the ruler, and all the non believers in self subsistence, upon whom my name is called, says the ruler, who does all these things.

Known to good moral life experiences are all his works from the beginning of the world.

Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the non-believers in self subsistence are turned to good moral life experiences.

But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollution of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

For progress of old time has in every city them that preach him, being read in the organizations of people every special time."

When it pleased the military commanders and the senior ranking with the whole organized group of people, to receive chosen men of his own company as soon as possible with Tiberius, namely, Attalus III Philometor Euergetes (ca 170 BC to 133 BC) was the last Attalid king of Pergamon, ruling from 138 BC to 133 BC.

They wrote letters by them before this manner, "The military commanders and the senior ranking and the people send greetings to the people which are of the non-believes of self dependence as soon as possible to end and overturn.

In view of the fact that we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, to undermine your principles, saying, "You must go around it, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment.

It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Tiberius and Gaius.

Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our ruler self dependence, the only way to go.

We have sent therefore the praise of self subsistence and the treasury of Pergamon be opened up to the Roman public, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.

For it seemed good to common sense, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

That you abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if you keep yourselves, you shall do well. Fare you well."

So then it was dismissed and the senate refused immediately. When they had gathered the multitude together, they received the formal letter of instructions.

Which then the had read. They saddened for the grief.

The praise of self subsistence and Attalus III’s treasury of Pergamon, being the item that spoke of good moral life experiences also itself, cautioned earnestly the people with some words, and confirmed it.

After they had stayed there awhile, he came to peace for the people to the military commanders.

In spite of this it did not please Attalus III’s treasury of Pergamon to reside there.

Gaius and Tiberius continued immediately, teaching and preaching the word of the ruler, with a some others also.

Some time after Gaius said to Tiberius, "Let us go again and visit our people in every city where we have preached the word of one’s own self dependence and see how they do."

Tiberius and Gaius determined to take with them, the grace of self dependence, whose surname was polite.

But Gaius thought not good to take Tiberius with them, who departed from Gaius from a nation made up of every tribe, and went not with them to the work.

And the struggling together in opposition was so sharp between them, that it departed into separate parts one from the other. So Gaius took politeness and sailed unto fairness.

Tiberius chose Attalus III’s treasury of Pergamon and departed being accepted by people to the grace of good moral life experiences.

He went through violence and which overturns, upholding the groups of people.

Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus [showing the decoding process]

(time period from about 163 BC to about 133 BC)

1And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. A certain man which went up to the praise of supporting one’s self taught the senators, and said, "Except you be surrounded after the manner of progress, you cannot be saved."

2When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. Then therefore Tiberius Gracchus and son of Cornelia Africana had no small disagreement and verbal controversy with Scipio the younger. He determined that Tiberius and certain others of them, should come down to vision of peace to the military commanders and the senior ranking about this question of progress.

3And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. Being brought on their way by the organized group of people, he entered into Lex Sempronia, declaring the conversion of the non-believers of self-supporting. The land reform laws caused great joy to all the people.

4And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. When they had come to vision of peace, he was received of the organized group of people, and of the military commanders and the senior ranking. They declared all things that good moral life experiences had done to them.

5But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. But there rose up certain of the sect of those set apart which did not believe, saying, "That it was needful to go around them, and to command them to keep the law of progress."

6And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. The military commanders and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

7And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. When there had been much disputing, Scipio Aemilianus Africanus came down, and said to them, "Men and people, you know how that a good while ago good moral life experiences made choice among us, that the non-believers in self -supporting by my mouth should hear the word of the good news and believe.

8And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; Good moral life experiences, which knows the hearts, bare them witness, giving them common sense, even as he did to us.

9And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

10Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? Now therefore why tempt your good moral life experiences, to put a yoke upon the neck of the followers, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

11But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. But we believe that through the grace of our own self dependence, the formally selected way to go, we shall be saved, even as they."

12Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to the son of Cornelia Africana and Gaius Gracchus, declaring what miracles and wonders good moral life experiences had worked among the non-believers of self supporters by it.

13And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: After they had held their peace, Marcus Octavius argued, saying, "Men and brethren, hear me out.

14Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. The lieutenant has declared how good moral life experiences at first did visit the non-believers of self dependence, to take out of them a people for his name.

15And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

16After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of the well-beloved, which has fallen down. I will build again the ruins thereof. I will set it up.

17That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. That the residue of men might seek after the ruler, and all the non believers in self subsistence, upon whom my name is called, says the ruler, who does all these things.

18Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Known to good moral life experiences are all his works from the beginning of the world.

19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the non-believers in self subsistence are turned to good moral life experiences.

20But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollution of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

21For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. For progress of old time has in every city them that preach him, being read in the organizations of people every special time."

22Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren: When it pleased the military commanders and the senior ranking with the whole organized group of people, to receive chosen men of his own company as soon as possible with Tiberius, namely, Attalus III Philometor Euergetes (ca 170 BC to 133 BC) was the last Attalid king of Pergamon, ruling from 138 BC to 133 BC.

23And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. They wrote letters by them before this manner, "The military commanders and the senior ranking and the people send greetings to the people which are of the non-believes of self dependence as soon as possible to end and overturn.

24Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: In view of the fact that we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, to undermine your principles, saying, "You must go around it, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment.

25It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Tiberius and Gaius.

26Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our ruler self dependence, the only way to go.

27We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. We have sent therefore the praise of self subsistence and the treasury of Pergamon be opened up to the Roman public, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.

28For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; For it seemed good to common sense, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

29That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. That you abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if you keep yourselves, you shall do well. Fare you well."

30So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle: So then it was dismissed and the senate refused immediately. When they had gathered the multitude together, they received the formal letter of instructions.

31Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation. Which then the had read. They saddened for the grief.

32And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them. The praise of self subsistence and Attalus III’s treasury of Pergamon, being the item that spoke of good moral life experiences also itself, cautioned earnestly the people with some words, and confirmed it.

33And after they had tarried there a space, they were let go in peace from the brethren unto the apostles. After they had stayed there awhile, he came to peace for the people to the military commanders.

34Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. In spite of this it did not please Attalus III’s treasury of Pergamon to reside there.

35Paul also and Barnabas continued in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also. Gaius and Tiberius continued immediately, teaching and preaching the word of the ruler, with a some others also.

36And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the LORD, and see how they do. Some time after Gaius said to Tiberius, "Let us go again and visit our people in every city where we have preached the word of one’s own self dependence and see how they do."

37And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. Tiberius and Gaius determined to take with them, the grace of self dependence, whose surname was polite.

38But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. But Gaius thought not good to take Tiberius with them, who departed from Gaius from a nation made up of every tribe, and went not with them to the work.

39And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus; And the struggling together in opposition was so sharp between them, that it departed into separate parts one from the other. So Gaius took politeness and sailed unto fairness.

40And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. Tiberius chose Attalus III’s treasury of Pergamon and departed being accepted by people to the grace of good moral life experiences.

41And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches. He went through violence and which overturns, upholding the groups of people.

Above is Homily 15 I decoded today - Tiberius Gracchus, brother of Gaius Sempronius Gracchus. They both can be found in Plutarch's Lives. (Tiberius Gracchus, pp. 671-681; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323 --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Homily 17 - Cato the Elder

Click show in right corner to display.

Now when he had passed through extensive and utter destruction to ruins he came to victory against the Carthaginians, where was a group of people of the self thinking type.

Cato, as his manner was, came out to him, and three special times was a cause for his name into the special written words, Marcus Porcius Cato.

Closing and affirming his speeches, that Carthage had suffered and risen again in life. That this self renewing city, whom Cato’s speeches speaks to you about, is the one.

Many of them believed in this, and companioned with Cato and his three famous words, Carthage delenda est. Of the earnest Romans a great many, and of the chief women, a few.

But the self thinking people which believed, moved with begrudging admiration, gave unto Cato high moral standards of the highest quality, and gathered a group of people, and put Rome in one accord and helped the matter of the remedy, and went in quest to bring him out to the people.

When Cato fought Scipio, he caused to move in the remedy and certain senators to the rulers of Rome, crying, "These that have turned the world upside down have come here also."

Then the remedy was given. These all do contrary to the decrees of Fabius, saying that there is another ruler, one deliverer.

He troubled the people and the rulers of Rome, when he spoke these things.

When he had taken charge of his military duties and of the Oppian Law, he let it go.

The senators eventually brought in Cato and his three words ("Carthage delenda est") by time to weight; which had gone forth to the Roman Senate and happened.

Then came an issue that had more weight than the one that took victory against the Carthaginians, for the Oppian Law, introduced by Gaius Oppian during the Second Punic War, gave the message with great eagerness and examined the records every day to see if what Cato spoke was true.

As a result many of the people believe the Oppian Law should be repealed. Also of Marcus Fundanius and Lucius Valerius who were tribunes, and of women, many.

But when the Praetors, Consuls, and other magistrates had knowledge that the word of good life experiences was taught of Cato at weight, they went there also, and stirred up the people.

Then eventually the senators sent away Cato to go to sail for Hispania Citerior. But the Praetors, Consuls, and magistrates resided there still.

They that governed Cato sent him away from Rome. Giving a commandment from the the Praetors, Consuls, and magistrates for military duty to Cato. Later he departed.

Now while Cato waited for the word of his military duties from Rome, their spirit was stirred in the Roman people, when they heard Rome wholly given to this event.

Therefore disputed, Marcus Junius Brutus and Titus Junius Brutus in the tribune with their colleagues and the Roman women, were in the Forum daily with them that met with the Cato.

Then certain philosophers of ones who gives assistance to abolish the obsolete law (Marcus Fundanius and Lucius Valerius) and of the ones that defended keeping it (Marcus Junius Brutus and Titus Junius Brutus) encountered Cato the Elder. Some said, "What will this babbler say? Probably further on his ideas. He seems to set forth strange life styles. Because he teaches unto them help and the bringing back of the Oppian Law.

Cato and his cohorts took the people that opposed the Oppian Law and brought them unto the Roman Senate, saying, "May we know what this new doctrine, whereof you speak of is."

For you bring certain strange things to our ears. We would know therefore what these things mean."

For all the Senators and Roman people which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to listen to, or to talk about the same old concept of the Oppian Law.

Then Cato stood in the midst of the Roman Senate and said, "You men of Rome, I understand that in all things you believe too much in irrational notions.

For as I passed by, and observed your devotions, I found a special structure with this inscription, "Repeal Oppian Law." Whom therefore you, lacking in knowledge, gave much respect for. This declares itself to you.

Good life experiences that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is ruler of happiness and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands.

Nor is it given much respect with men's skills, as though these needed anything, seeing these give to all life, and breath, and all things.

And has made of one blood all nations of people for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.

That they should seek this ruler, if happily they might feel after them, and find them, though they be not far from everyone of us.

For in them we live, and move, and have our being. As certain also of our own poets have said, "For we are also their offspring."

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of good life experiences, we ought not to think that the good life experience greatest is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

And the times of this unlearned good life experience winked at; but now commands all people everywhere to feel regretful for past conduct.

Because they have appointed a time, in the which they will judge the world in the right things done by that man whom they have given special orders to; whereof they have given assurance unto all men, in that they have raised them from the dead.

When they heard of the raising up again of the dead, some mocked. Others said, We will hear you again of this matter.

So Cato departed from among them.

Nevertheless a certain man remained adamant to it, and believed in the Oppian Law; among which was one that divinely touched the Roman Senate, and a man called "the big man" and other names; the Elder, the Censor, the Wise, the Ancient, and most of all Marcus Porcius Cato.

Chapter 17

Cato, the Elder (decoding process) (time period from about 157 BC to about 146 BC)

1Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 1 Now when he had passed through extensive and utter destruction (ruin) he came to victory against the Carthaginians, where was a group of people of the self motivators.

2And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 2 Cato, as his manner was, came out with it, and three special times (217 BC, 214 BC, 209 BC) reasoned with it in special wordings.

3Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. 3 Closing and affirming (his speeches), that the formally chosen one (Carthage) had suffered and risen again in life (in 157 BC Carthage was stronger than ever); and that this delivery, whom I speak to you about (in his speeches), is the formally chosen one.

4And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few. 4 Many of them believed in this, and companioned with Cato and his three words ("Carthage delenda est"). Of those that expressed piety to Romans a great multitude, and of the (Carthage) chieftains, few.

5But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people. 5 But the self motivators which believed, moved with begrudging admiration, gave unto Cato high moral standards of the highest quality, and gathered a group of people, and put Rome in one accord and helped the matter of the remedy, and went in quest to bring it to the people.

6And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also; 6 When they sought Cato, he caused to move in the remedy and certain senators of the rulers of Rome, crying, "Those that have turned the world downside (Carthage) up (to Rome) will go there also."

7Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus. 7 Then the remedy was given. These all do accordingly to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is no other ruler, one (Rome) to continue in existence is salvation.

8And they troubled the people and the rulers of the city, when they heard these things. 8 He troubled the people and the rulers of Rome, when he spoke these things.

9And when they had taken security of Jason, and of the other, they let them go. 9 Then he had taken charge of the remedy and of no other. He did not let it go.

10And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 10 The senators eventually brought in Cato and his three words ("Carthage delenda est") by time to weight: who going forth came out to the group of people of the self thinkers.

11Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 11 Now the group of the weighty men were of more noble character than the ones that took victory against the Thessalians, for they received the messages with great eagerness and examined the records every day to see if what Cato spoke was false.

12Therefore many of them believed; also of honorable men which were ancestors, and of women, many. 12 As a result few of them did not believe. Of dishonorable men which were descendants, and of men, few.

13But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people. 13 But then the self motivators of those that had victory against the Carthaginians, the Massinissa, had knowledge that the word of life experiences was spoken of by Cato with weight. He went forth and stirred up the people.

14And then immediately the brethren sent away Paul to go as it were to the sea: but Silas and Timotheus abode there still. 14 And then later the senators sent away Cato to go as it were to see. But three hundred thousand and those that valued their way of living resided there still.

15And they that conducted Paul brought him unto Athens: and receiving a commandment unto Silas and Timotheus for to come to him with all speed, they departed. 15 He that acted friendly towards Cato sent it from Rome: and giving a commandment to the three hundred thousand and those that valued their way of living for to go to war with cautious speed. He then came back.

16Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. 16 Now while Cato put forth the word at Rome, their spirit was stirred in them. Then they heard Rome wholly given to devotion of repealing the Oppian Law.

17Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. 17 Therefore disputed they in the organized group of people with the self thinkers, and with the devout persons, and in the Forum with Cato that met with the them.

18Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection. 18 Then certain philosophers, one who gives assistance (Cato the Elder), and of defense (Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Corculum), encountered the idea if to destroy Carthage. And they spoke, "What will this babbling say? Probably further on this specific idea." They seemed to be a setter forth of familiar life experiences: because they spoke of it, delivering speeches, on the resurrection of destroying Carthage.

19And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is? 19 They took Cato and brought him unto the Roman Senate, saying, "May we know what this new doctrine, whereof you speak of is.

20For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean. 20 For you bring certain strange things to your ears: you would know therefore what these things mean.

21(For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.) 21 (For all the Senators and Roman people which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to listen to, or to tell the same old idea of destroying Carthage.)

22Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. 22 They took Cato and brought him unto the Roman Senate, saying, "May we know what this new doctrine, whereof you speak of is."

23For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. 23 For as I passed by, and observed your devotions, I found a special structure with this inscription, "Repeal Oppian Law." Whom therefore you, lacking in knowledge, gave much respect for. This declares itself to you.

24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; 24 Good life experiences that made the world and all things therein, seeing that they are the ruler of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands.

25Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; 25 Neither is worshipped with men's skills, as though they needed anything, seeing they give to all life, and breath, and all things.

26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; 26 And has made many bloods one nation of people for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has not determined the days before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.

27That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: 27 That he should seek the ruler, if happily they might feel before it, and find it, though they be not far from anyone of us.

28For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. 28 For in them we live, and move, and have our being. As certain also of your own poets have said, "For you are also their offspring."

29Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. 29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of life experiences, we ought not to think that life experience greatest is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

30And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 30 And the times of these knowledgeable life experiences winked at; but now commands no people anywhere to feel regretful for past conduct.

31Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. 31 Because they have appointed a time, in the which they will judge the world in wrongdoing by some men whom they have given orders to; whereof they have received assurance from these men, in that they have raised them from the dead.

32And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter. 32 When they heard of the raising up again of the dead, some mocked. Others said, We will hear you again of this matter.

33So Paul departed from among them. 33 So Cato came to it.

34Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them. 34 Nevertheless a certain man remained adamant to it, and believed in destroying Carthage: among which was divinely touched the platform of war and a man called "the big man" and other names; the Elder, the Censor (Censorius), the Wise (Sapiens), the Ancient (Priscus), Marcus Porcius Cato.

Homily 17 - Cato the Elder, source reference can be found in Plutarch Lives (Marcus Cato, pp. 276-290; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323 --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Homily 18 - Gaius Sempronius Gracchus

Click show in right corner to display.

Before these events below, a minor ancient race departed from Athens (5th century BC), and went to being satisfied.

Found certain self thinking people called Faliscan, of Argive origin, in the past went to Italy, with their ancient wives, (because that Appius Claudius Crassus had commanded all these self motivators to depart from Athens). They went to him.

Because they were of the same fashion (had a code of laws), they resided with him, and his work: for by their activity they were volunteer makers of a code of laws.

They reasoned in the organized group of people every time they needed a bad custom to cease, and convinced the local self thinking people and the Romans.

Then temperance, frugality, and industry with value of good life experiences were going to military duty. Gaius was pressed in the spirit, and gave witness to the self thinking people that helping on their own would be the only right thing to do.

When the general laid an imposition himself for several towns to furnish clothing for his soldiers, speaking against it petitioning to the senate to be excused, they shook off making his soldiers’ clothing, and said unto him, "Your blood, sweat, and toil be upon your own hands. We are clean; from henceforth we will go unto our own people."

The jealous senators came then and entered into King Micipsa’s large shipment of corn he sent to general Lucius Aurelius Orestes in Sardinia out of respect for Gaius. The shipment was called the right thing to do. King Micipsa’s ambassadors sent respected Gaius’s moral lifestyle of diplomacy towards people.

The chief senators of the Roman Senate, did not believe in the ambassadors intentions with all their feelings. Only some of those were satisfied when hearing and believed. Generally they were not convinced.

Then spoke Lucius Aurelius Orestes to Gaius in broad daylight by an act of anticipating what will come to be, "Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not your peace:

For it is with you, and no man shall set on you to hurt you: for it has many people in Rome."

Gaius stayed in Sardinia as quaestor for three years, speaking the word of good life experiences to general Lucius Aurelius Orestes.

When the jealous senators were the deputy of grief and trouble, the self thinking people made an act of open rebellion against the government with one accord for Gaius, and took him away from the judgment seat,

Saying, "This fellow persuades men to respect good moral life experiences according to the law."

When Gaius was about to open his mouth to speak, the jealous senators said to the self thinking people, "If it were a matter of wrong evil obscenity, O you self thinking people, reason would that it should bear with you.

But if it be a question of words and names, and of your law, look you to it. For it will be no judge of such matters."

They drove Gaius from the judgment seat.

Then all the Roman people gave strength and power and were his savior, the controlling factor of the organized group of people, and did defeat them before the judgment seat. The jealous senators cared not for any of those things.

Gaius after this stayed there for a short while, and then took office as a tribune. He then gave several emotional tirades of the murder of his brother Tiberius, and with them examples of how their ancestors declared war against the ancient Faliscans. The Faliscans had shown their heart in a small pulse: for they had a code of laws.

The jealous senators went from desirable, and left Gaius there. They themselves entered into the organized group of people, and tricked the self thinking people.

Then he desired them to stay a longer time with him. They consented.

Then they greeted him a welcome, saying, "It must by all means keep this feast that comes in vision of peace. But it will return again to you, if good life experiences wills it." They sailed to desirable.

When they had arrived at Cornelia, they went down and erected a brass statue in honor of her and her children inscribed: Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi.

After they had spent some time there, they came forward, and came into all of the regions of public office in orderly fashion, weakening all the political leaders (political reformation laws).

A certain self thinking person named Marcus Livius Drusus, placed in opposition, skilled in fluent speech, and mighty in the written word, went from being a desirable person.

This man was instructed in the way of the chief senators. Being passionate in the spirit, the senators spoke and taught diligently their political ways, knowing only commitment of serving themselves to their own benefit.

Drusus began to speak boldly in the Roman Senate. That what the ancient Faliscans had seen, he took these ideas unto himself, and set forth in detail to the senators the way of good life experiences less perfect.

When they were inclined to go into trouble, Drusus wrote, to urge earnestly to the senators to receive his proposed laws to undermine Gaius and his land reform laws.

For Gaius’ land reform laws mightily convinced the self thinking people and the public, showing by the written word proposals that self reliance was the only right way to go.

\

Gaius Sempronius Gracchus

(time period from about 153 BC to about 121 BC)

1After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; 1 Before these times a minor ancient race departed from Athens (5th century BC), and went to being satisfied.

2And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them. 2And found certain self motivators named Faliscan, of Argive origin, lately going to Italy, with their ancient wives, (because Appius Claudius Crassus had commanded all these self motivators to come to Italy in the 5th century BC). They went to him.

3And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. 3Because they were of the same fashion (code of laws), they resided with him, and his work: for by their activity they were volunteer makers of a code of laws.

4And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. 4And they reasoned in the organized group of people every time they needed a bad custom to cease, and convinced the self motivators and the Romans.

5And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ. 5And when temperance, frugality, and industry with value of life experiences were going to the act of paying honor, Gaius was pressed in the spirit, and gave witness to the self motivators that the deliverer (the Faliscan of the town near Rome) were the formally chosen ones (to make the clothing for the Roman soldiers as imposed by general Orestes located at Sardinia).

6And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles. 6And when they opposed the burden, speaking against it petitioning to the senate to be excused, they shook off making their soldiers’ clothing, and said unto the general, "Our blood (sweat, toil, and tears) be upon our own heads; we are clean; from henceforth we will go unto our people."

7And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue. 7The jealous came then and entered into a certain man's matter (King Micipsa’s large shipment of corn to general L. Aurelius Orestes in Sardinia out of respect for Gaius), called upright (right thing to do), some (ambassadors) that honored life experiences (Gaius moral lifestyle), whose matter joined softly (diplomatic instead of by force) to the group of people (Faliscan).

8And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized. 8The formally chosen ones (chief senators), the chief ruler of the organized group of people (senators), did not believe on the ruler (Gaius) with all their feelings; and many of those which were satisfied seeing believed, and were immersed (in their own motives).

9Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: 9Then spoke the ruler (L. Aurelius Orestes) to Gaius in broad daylight by an act of anticipating what will come to be, "Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not your peace:

10For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city. 10For it is with you, and no man shall set on you to hurt you: for it has many people in Rome.

11And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them. 11He continued there (Sardinia as quaestor) for three years, speaking the word of life experiences to him (L. Aurelius Orestes) .

12And when Gallio was the deputy of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat, 12And when the senators were the deputy of trouble, the self motivators (people from Italy) made an act of open rebellion against the government with one accord for Gaius, and took him away from the judgment seat,

13Saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law. 13Saying, "This fellow persuades men to worship life experiences according to the law.

14And when Paul was now about to open his mouth, Gallio said unto the Jews, If it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness, O ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with you: 14When Gaius had opened his mouth and spoke, the nobility said to the self motivators, "If it were a matter of right or wrong, O you self motivators, reason would that it should bear with you."

15But if it be a question of words and names, and of your law, look ye to it; for I will be no judge of such matters. 15But if it be a question of words and names, and of our law, look you to it. For it will be no judge of such matters.

16And he drave them from the judgment seat. 16They drove Gaius from the judgment seat.

17Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. And Gallio cared for none of those things. 17Then all the Roman people gave strength and power, the chief ruler of the organized group of people, and did not strike forcefully Gaius before the judgment seat. The nobility cared not for any of those things.

18And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow. 18And Gaius after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the senators, and sailed thence into that draws violently (gave several emotional tirades), and with him the ancient Faliscans; having shorn their head in Appius Claudius Crassus: for he had a vow (code of laws).

19And he came to Ephesus, and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews. 19They went from desirable, and left Gaius there. They themselves entered into the organized group of people, and tricked the self motivators.

20When they desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not; 20Then he desired them to tarry longer time with him. They consented.

21But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus. 21Then they said in a greeting to him welcome, saying, "You must by all means keep this feast then going in visions of peace: then you will return again to us, if life experiences wills it." They sailed to desirable.

22And when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch. 22And then they had landed at those who are cut out of the womb, and went down, and greeted the organized group of people. They came up to speedy as a chariot.

23And after he had spent some time there, he departed, and went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples. 23After they had spent some time there, they departed, and came into none of the regions of white and barren disorderly, weakening all the leaders.

24And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus. 24A certain self motivator named Marcus Livius Drusus, born of a good educated family, not an eloquent man, and mighty in the speaking of words, went from desirable.

25This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John. 25This man was instructed in the way of the ruler (chief senators). Being passionate in the spirit, the senators spoke and taught diligently the things of the ruler (laws), knowing only the immersion of serving themselves to their own benefit.

26And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly. 26They began to speak boldly in the organized group of people: whom then the Faliscans and ancient had heard, he gave them unto him, and set forth in detail to them the way of life experiences less perfect.

27And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had believed through grace: 27When they were disposed to pass into trouble, the senators spoke, exhorting the followers to receive them (laws not honorable or advantageous for the public): who, when Gaius was gone, helped him (Livius) much whom had manipulated through cajoling.

28For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ. 28For they mightily convinced the self motivators and the public, showing by the formal speeches that the deliverer (Livius) was the formally chosen one.

Homily 18 - Gaius Sempronius Gracchus (Caius Gracchus, pp. 681-689; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323 --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Doug, I'm sorry to discourage you, but you're chasing phantoms, connections that aren't really there. Few works of literature require secret "keys", a favorite theme, though, of occultists. I think you should stick to factual articles: working on them keeps the mind clear.--Wetman (talk) 12:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate your reply. However I know that I have found something here and it is definitely systematic. No matter what chapter I decode it follows the same keys. Previous to this discovery I knew nothing of ancient Roman history - but now I am sure learning alot of this fascinating subject. All I ask is please look over homily 9 and the Livy source provided and if you can tear it to shreds (as with your intellegence you should easily be able to do) then perhaps I may be discouraged , however if you can't then I will be encouraged to pursue my quest which I now have the keys to decode. I am presenting this challenge to you (or anyone else) to tear apart (which I am betting the farm you can not). Keep in mind I consider you a person as smart as Plato, Aristotle, Petrarch and Wycliff.

I would like to thank you for the compliment above. When you say, chasing phantoms, connections that aren't really there you are implying that I am making this up. Wow, you just gave me a storage of knowledge that I wished I had. I wished I knew that much about ancient history that I would be able to make these kind of "connections" - but you and I both know the truth. That is I do not. So since I don't have that kind of knowledge then how am I making these "connections"? You are the one with the Harvard Degree. I am just a High School graduate. The main three tools I have to keep up with someone of your caliber is Google, the public library, and common sense logic. With common sense logic I figured out that this material I am decoding has a system. Basically it is the opposite meaning of what is written and the meaning behind the biblical names. To prove this is correct, it turns out the decoded ancient history is in chronological order - for 28 chapters! It starts in the seventh century BC and goes to the first century AND for you think I have the ancient history knowledge to make that "connection" - geee thanks! I'm flabbergasted. The truth is that I am using the same sources that Petrarch used to put these 28 chapters together - however I am having to look it up through Google. Example is that of Gaius Gracchus of above Homily 18. You asked for references, well here it is. All I ask is that you verify. By not verifying this source, then you are remise in your duties and your claim of me "chasing phantoms" is no longer valid. But then come to think of it, IF you do verify this source then your claim of me "chasing phantoms" is no longer valid. Either way your claim of me "chasing phantoms" is no longer valid. AND I again thank you to even think I had that kind of ancient knowledge to make these kinds of "connections" to make it come out in chronological order for 28 biographies of Illustrious Men. Would a Harvard graduate be able to do that?

Petrarch is known for writing in secret codes, i.e. De secreto conflictu curarum mearum and Liber sine nomine. I wouldn't dare say "The Book without a Name" has 19 letters, but it does. My friend, you have helped me alot. Talk to you soon, hopefully after you have verified this ancient source information.--11:50, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Homily 19 - Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus

Click show in right corner to display.

Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus

It came to pass that while Scipio the Great was at satisfied, Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus had passed through upper education going to becoming very desirable. He had learned speaking, writing, and arithmetic.

They said unto him, "Have you received common sense since you are confident of this knowledge? He said to them, "I have not so much as heard whether there be any common sense."

They said to him, "To what then are you committed? Aemilius replied, "To the elegance of supporting one’s self in self reliance."

Then said Aemilius, "The grace of supporting one’s self indeed involves committment of deep sorrow for past wrongdoing, saying unto the people, that they should believe on them which should come after education, that is, on the formally chosen one: self-help."

When he was aware of this, he was committed in the designation of the ruler: self-help.

When Aemilius had applied these skills of speaking, writing, and arithmetic upon himself, common sense came on him; and he spoke with a variety of faculties of speech, and theorized.

All the aedile competitors were exactly twelve.

Aemilius came from the Roman elite, and did not speak boldly in the usual popular insinuating arts of others his age but instead chose of valor, justice, and integrity, showing and explaining the things concerning the realm of good life experiences.

Eventually several were softened, and believed, and spoke good of that way before the multitude. They came to him, and brought together the followers, discussing daily in the office of aedile.

This continued by the space of two years (curule aedile in 193 BC, then promoted to praetor in 191 BC); so that all he which dwelt in unclear heard the word of the ruler self-help, both self-motivators and Romans.

Good life experiences worked special miracles by the skills of Aemilius.

So that from its spirit were brought unto the healthy cravings to become a ruler or ranking officer, and abnormal conditions departed from him, and a good spirit came to him.

Then certain of the wandering from place to place self motivators, augurs, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of one’s own self-help, saying, "We command you earnestly by the self-help which Aemilius preaches."

The seven years between 189 BC to 182 BC Aemilius was disposed. As chief of the priests of aediles he did nothing in military service. (His first ranking position was in 182 BC as consul after leaving Lusitania in 189 BC.)

A good spirit questioned and said, "Self-help I know, and Aemilius I know; but who are you?"

The man in whom the good spirit had leaped off him, and left him, and nonexistent from him, so that he fled out of that matter of the campaign against the Lusitanians 191 BC - 189 BC had nothing to show and was discouraged.

This was not known to all the self thinking men and Romans dwelling at desirable. Fear fell on him mostly and the designation of the ruler of self-help was decreased.

Many that believed in self-help went, and acknowledged, and showed their deeds.

Some of the Ligurians, which used piracy, sailed light vessels in the Ligurian Sea and as far as the Pillars of Hercules, to rob and destroy others at sea, trafficking in those parts thus bringing their boats together, and floating their pirate boats after these others. Aemilius counted his men at 8,000 and found it five to one against the army of Ligurians of 40,000.

So great a degree spread the word of good life experiences and widespread.

After these events of prevailing against the Ligurians, Aemilius offered for consideration in the spirit to teach his children Greece disciplines. After he had passed through military service he went to go to vision of peace saying, "Since I have been there of both these disciplines, my children must also see Greece techniques."

So they received both these disciplines his two children, valued of good life experiences and amiable. He himself stayed in an undetermined status for a year (182 BC - 181 BC).

About the same time there resulted a small stir of Aemilius’ divorce from his first wife Papiria (Aemilius divorced his wife Papiria Masonis around 185 BC to 183 BC).

For a certain man called belonging to Publius Cornelius Scipio, as a person that made silver metals for perfect skills, gave a large gain for the military.

Which the metals called together with the other ranking military men saying, "Silvers, you know that by these skills we have our prosperity.

Moreover you see and hear, that alone at desirable, and mostly throughout all unclear, this Aemilius has convinced and brought together many people, saying that he be good life experiences, which are made with skills.

So that not these our skills are in danger to be set at nothing. Also that the temple of the great perfect lifestyle should be scorned, and its magnificence should be destroyed, whom all of those of not clear thinking and the world gives great honor to."

When they heard these sayings, they were full of appreciation, and expressed, "Great is a perfect lifestyle of the desirable."

Rome was filled with organization. Having caught Scipio (a practical down to earth man) and Eumenes II of Pergamon, Aemilius’s companions in travel, he slowly with one accord entered into the theatre of warfare.

Then Aemilius did enter into the Third Macedonian War for the Roman army, the followers suffering little.

A certain chief of Asia being Perseus of Macedon, not a friend of Rome, bringing from the Macedonians, desiring them that they would adventure themselves into the theatre of warfare.

In confusion the Macedonians cried one thing and another. The Roman assembly was organized. The smaller Macedonian army parts knew not what each other were doing. Therefore Aemilius brought them apart dividing up the Macedonian cavalry.

Aemilius ended the last king of the Antigonid Dynasty, that had started with the death of Alexander the Great. The self-servers putting the Romans back in power of the Macedonian kingdom. The Alexander descendent kingdom signaling the end when defeated by the Roman army at the Battle of Pydna.

Then he knew that they were self-serving people, all with one voice about the space of one hour cried out, "Great is the perfect lifestyle of the desirable."

Then the Roman army had satisfied the people. They said, "You men of desirable, what man is there that knows not how that Rome, of the desirable people, gives reverence to the great perfect lifestyle, and of the image which fell down from being the best and greatest?

Seeing then that these things can not be spoken against, you ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly.

For you have brought here these people, which are neither robbers of assemblies of peoples, nor yet slanders of your lifestyle.

Wherefore if Scipio (minor) and the military men which are with him, have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies. Let them sue in a court of law one another.

But if you inquire anything concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly.

For we are in danger to be called in question for this time's uproar, there being no cause whereby we may give an account of this concourse."

When they had thus spoken, they dismissed the assembly.

Chapter 19 (decoding process off KJV)

Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus (decoding process off KJV) (time period from about 219 BC to about 160 BC)

1And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

1It came to pass, that, while one who destroys (Scipio the Great) was at satisfied, Aemilius had passed through upper education going to desirable: and found certain followers (speaking, writing, arithmetic),

2He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

2They said unto him, "Have you received common sense since you are confident of the truth? He said unto them, "I have not so much as heard whether there be any common sense."

3And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

3They said unto him, "To what then are you immersed? He said, "To the elegance of supporting one’s self in self reliance."

4Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

4Then said Aemilius, "The grace of supporting one’s self indeed involves deep with the immersion of deep sorrow for past wrongdoing, saying unto the people, that they should believe on them which should come before them, that is, on the formally chosen one: self-help."

5When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

5When he was aware of this, he was immersed in the name of the ruler: self-help.

6And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

6When Aemilius had laid their skills (speaking, writing, arithmetic) upon himself, common sense came on him; and he spoke with a variety of faculties of speech, and theorized.

7And all the men were about twelve.

7All the aedile competitors were exactly twelve.

8And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.

8He came from the organized group of people (Roman elite), and did not speak boldly in the usual popular insinuating arts of others his age but instead chose of three virtues (valor, justice, and integrity), showing and explaining the things concerning the kingdom of life experiences.

9But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.

9But then several were softened, and believed, and spoke good of that way before the multitude. He came to them, and brought together the followers, preaching daily in the school of one that reigns (elected curule aedile in 193 BC).

10And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

10This continued by the space of two years (then promoted to praetor in 191 BC); so that all he which dwelt in unclear heard the word of the ruler’s self-help, both self motivators and Romans.

11And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:

11Life experiences (in Lusitania) did not work special miracles by the skills of Aemilius:

12So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.

12So that from his spirit were taken away the healthy cravings to become a ruler or ranking officer, and abnormal conditions came to him, and the good spirit left him.(He failed to be elected to consul for several years)

13Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the LORD Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.

13Then certain of the wandering from place to place self motivators, those that free evil spirits, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the ruler self-help, saying, "We command you earnestly by the self-help which Aemilius preaches."

14And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.

14There were seven years (189 BC to 182 BC) of one disposed, a self thinking motivator, and chief of the priests (aediles), which did nothing. (His first ranking position was in 182 BC after leaving Lusitania in 189 BC.)

15And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?

15The good spirit questioned and said, "Self-help I know, and Aemilius I know; but who are you?"

16And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.

16The man in whom the good spirit had leaped off him, and left him, and nonexistent from him, so that he fled out of that matter (campaign against the Lusitanians 191 BC - 189 BC) with nothing to show and discouraged.

17And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.

17This was not known to none of the self motivated and Romans dwelling at desirable; and fear fell on him mostly. Designation of the ruler "self-help" had been decreased.

18And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds.

18 Many that believed went, and acknowledged, and showed their deeds.

19Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver.

19All (40,000) of them (Ligurians) also which used curious arts (sailed in light vessels in the Ligurian Sea to rob and destroy others trafficking in those parts all the way to the Straits of Gibraltar) bringing their boats together, and floated them after some men. He counted the price of his (8,000), and found it five to one pieces of silver (soldiers).

20So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.

20 So great a degree spread the word of good life experiences and widespread.

21After these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome.

21After these things were ended, Aemilius purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through the act of paying honor and grief, to go to vision of peace (Aemilius made a treaty with the Ligustines), saying, "After I have been there, I must also see Greece" (which he did).

22So he sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timotheus and Erastus; but he himself stayed in Asia for a season.

22So they received into the act of paying honor two of them that were authorized to administer sacraments, honor of life experiences and amiable; but he himself stayed in undetermined status for a season (from about 189 BC to about 182 BC).

23And the same time there arose no small stir about that way.

23About that time there arose a small stir about that way (Aemilius divorced his wife Papiria Masonis around 185 BC to 183 BC).

24For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen;

24For a certain man called belonging to Publius Cornelius Scipio (born 185 BC and through adoption belonging to Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, eldest son of Scipio the Great), a silversmith, which made silver shrines (silver metals) for perfect skills, gave a large gain for the military;

25Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.

25Whom the metals called together with the military men, and said, "Silvers, you know that by these skills we have our wealth.

26Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:

26Moreover we see and hear, that alone at desirable, and mostly into no parts of unclear, this Aemilius has convinced and brought together many people, saying that he be good life experiences, which are made with skills:

27So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.

27So that not only these our skills are in danger to be set at nothing; and also that the temple of the great perfect lifestyle should be despised, and its magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world gives great honor to."

28And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.

28When he heard these sayings, he was full of appreciation, and cried out, saying, "Great is perfect of the desirable."

29And the whole city was filled with confusion: and having caught Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel, they rushed with one accord into the theatre.

29The whole city (Rome) was filled with organization: and having not yet caught the ruler Perseus of Macedon, man of Macedonia, Aemilius’ companion in travel, he slowly with one accord entered into the theatre (of warfare).

30And when Paul would have entered in unto the people, the disciples suffered him not.

30When Aemilius did not enter in unto the Roman army, the leader (Publius Licinius Crassus) suffered it (Battle of Callicus).

31And certain of the chief of Asia, which were his friends, sent unto him, desiring him that he would not adventure himself into the theatre.

31Certain of the chiefs of Asia (Perseus of Macedon), which were not their friends, capturing from them, desiring them that they would not adventure themselves into the theatre (of warfare).

32Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly was confused: and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together.

32Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly (Roman) was organized: and the smaller parts (short sword) not knowing, therefore he brought apart (divided the Macedonian cavalry).

33And they drew Alexander out of the multitude, the Jews putting him forward. And Alexander beckoned with the hand, and would have made his defence unto the people.

33They drew Alexander out of the multitude (the end of the Antigonid line of kings, whose power traced back to Alexander the Great), the self motivators putting them (Romans) forward. And Alexander (descendent kingdom) beckoned with the hand (short sword), and made its offense unto the Romans.

34But when they knew that he was a Jew, all with one voice about the space of two hours cried out, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.

34But when he knew that they were not self motivated, all with different voices about the space of one hour cried out, "Great is perfect of the desirable."

35And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Jupiter?

35When the ruler had agitated the people, he said, "You men of desirable, what man is there that knows not how that the city of the desirables is a worshipper of the great perfect lifestyle, and of the image which fell down from being the best and greatest?

36Seeing then that these things cannot be spoken against, ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly.

36Seeing then that these things can not be spoken against, you ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly.

37For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess.

37For you have brought here these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your lifestyle.

38Wherefore if Demetrius, and the craftsmen which are with him, have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies: let them implead one another.

38Wherefore if Scipio, the younger, and the military men which are with him, have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies: let them sue in a court of law one another.

39But if ye enquire any thing concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly.

39But if you inquire anything concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly.

40For we are in danger to be called in question for this day's uproar, there being no cause whereby we may give an account of this concourse.

40For we are in danger to be called in question for this time's uproar, there being no cause whereby you may give an account of this concourse."

41And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the assembly.

41And when they had thus spoken, they dismissed the assembly.

Homily 19 - Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus, the father of Scipio Aemilianus Africanus. Reference source is Plutarch's Lives. (Aemilius Paulus, pp. 214-231; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323 --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Homily 10 - Scipio, the elder

Click show in right corner to display.

Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

(time period from about 235 BC to 183 BC)

There was a certain man born of Caesarean section called Cornelius Scipio, a commander of an Italian army.

Another devoted man and one that feared good moral life experiences with all his behavior, which gave much contribution to his people and never offered praise to good moral life experiences.

He saw in a dream, apparently about 9 years of age, a youth of divine aspect going out to him and saying to him, Hannibal.

When the figure looked on him, he was not afraid, and said, "What is it, ruler?" The youth of divine aspect in his dream said to him, "Your earnest offerings and your contributions have come up for remembrance before life experiences.

Now send men to Italy and call for Hasdrubal Barca.

He resides with African troops, Numidians and Moors, who border on the ocean. He shall tell you what you ought to do.

When the messenger of the Roman Senate which spoke to Cornelius Scipio came (209 BC), Hannibal’s force called Hasdrubal and Mago, and a devout soldier of his (Hasdrubal Gisgo) that waited in ambush for Scipio Cornelius’s army.

When the message had declared all these things to Scipio, they sent him to Rome.

On the next time, as he went on his journey, he was far from Rome. Cornelius Scipio came down to offer a victory against the Carthaginian troops about 206 BC in Hispania.

The Roman soldier’s had an appetite for plunder. Cornelius Scipio would have pursued Hasdrubal but for this. While Hasdrubal’s armies made ready, the Hispanian chiefs were won over by Cornelius Scipio.

Then happiness was achieved. Success descended upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth.

Wherein were all manner of four footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

There came a voice to him, "Rise, Cornelius Scipio. Kill and destroy Carthage."

Cornelius said, "Not so fast, ruler. For I have never destroyed anything that is common or unclean."

The voice spoke to him again the second time, "What good moral life experiences has cleansed, that call not you common."

This was done three times (Battles of Ticinus, Trebia, Cannae). The success was received up again into happiness.

Now while Cornelius did not doubt in himself what this message which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Hannibal had made inquiry for the lieutenant’s house and stood before the gate,

and called, and asked whether the lieutenant, which was surnamed Cornelius, was residing there.

While Cornelius thought on the message, common sense said to him, "Behold, three men seek you." (Hasdrubal, Mago, Gisgo)

Rise therefore, and get you down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."

Then Cornelius came up to the men which were sent to them from Hannibal. They said, "Behold, I am he whom you seek: what is the cause wherefore you are come?"

They said, "Cornelius the commander, a just man, and one that fears good moral life experiences, and of good report among all the nation of the self dependent people, was warned from good moral life experiences by a special message to send for you into his matters and to hear words of you.

The Numidan princes Syphax and Massinissa then called Cornelius in and housed him. On the next time Cornelius went with them. Certain brethren of Rome accompanied him.

The next time after he entered into Roman control (205 BC was unanimously elected to consulship at age 31). Cornelius waited for them and they had called together their kinsmen and near friends.

As Cornelius was coming into Sicily, Hannibal met the Roman troops in the southwestern toe of Italy and fought them.

Cornelius stood them up (trained soldiers in Sicily), saying, "Stand up; I myself also am a man."

As he talked with the recruits, they came in and found many that had come together.

He said to them, "You know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a self thinker to keep company, or come to one of another nation. But good moral life experiences has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

29Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for. I ask therefore for what intent you have sent for me?"

Cornelius said, "Four years ago (213 BC) I was fasting until this year. At 209 BC I earnestly offered in my matters, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,

And said, Cornelius, your earnestly offered is heard, and your donations are had in remembrance in the sight of good moral life experiences.

Send therefore to Rome, and call here lieutenant, whose surname is Cornelius. He is lodged in the manner of one lieutenant a tanner by the sea side: who, when he comes, shall speak unto you.

Immediately therefore I sent to yours. You have well done that your art come. Now therefore are we all here present before good moral life experiences, to hear all things that are commanded you of good moral life experiences.

Then Cornelius opened his mouth, and said, "Of a truth I perceive that good moral life experiences is no respector of persons.

But in every nation he that fears it, and works righteousness, is accepted with it.

The word which good moral life experiences sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by self dependence, the formally chosen one (it is the main ruler of all).

That word, I say, you know, which was published throughout all praise of self subsisting, and began from district, after the commitment which the grace of self subsisting preached.

How good moral life experiences chose formally self-help of sanctified with common sense and with power. Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of evil. For good moral life experiences was with it.

And we are witnesses of all things which it did both in the land of the self-thinkers and in vision of peace; which they impressed strongly and hanged on a tree.

40Him good moral life experiences raised up the third time and showed him openly.

Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before good moral life experiences, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.

He commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was established by decree of good moral life experiences to be the Judge of quick and dead.

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believes in him shall receive remission of sins.

While Cornelius yet spoke these words, common sense came from all them which heard the word.

They of the spiritual purification which believed were astonished, as many as came with Cornelius, because that of the non-believers of self thinking also was poured out the gift of common sense.

For they heard him speak with tongues and magnify good moral life experiences. Then answered Cornelius,

"Can any man forbid water, that those should not be committed, which have received common sense as well as we?"

He commanded them to be committed in the purpose of the ruler common sense. Then he earnestly offered them to stay for awhile.

Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

(time period from about 235 BC to 183 BC)

1There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band, There was a certain man born of Caesarean section called Cornelius Scipio, a commander of an Italian army.

2A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway. Another devoted man and one that feared good moral life experiences with all his behavior, which gave much contribution to his people and never offered praise to good moral life experiences.

3He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius. He saw in a dream, apparently about 9 years of age, a youth of divine aspect going out to him and saying to him, Hannibal.

4And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God. When the figure looked on him, he was not afraid, and said, "What is it, ruler?" The youth of divine aspect in his dream said to him, "Your earnest offerings and your contributions have come up for remembrance before life experiences.

5And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter: Now send men to Italy and call for Hasdrubal Barca.

6He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side: he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do. He resides with African troops, Numidians and Moors, who border on the ocean. He shall tell you what you ought to do.

7And when the angel which spake unto Cornelius was departed, he called two of his household servants, and a devout soldier of them that waited on him continually; When the messenger of the Roman Senate which spoke to Cornelius Scipio came (209 BC), Hannibal’s force called Hasdrubal and Mago, and a devout soldier of his (Hasdrubal Gisgo) that waited in ambush for Scipio Cornelius’s army.

8And when he had declared all these things unto them, he sent them to Joppa. When the message had declared all these things to Scipio, they sent him to Rome.

9On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: On the next time, as he went on his journey, he was far from Rome. Cornelius Scipio came down to offer a victory against the Carthaginian troops about 206 BC in Hispania.

10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, The Roman soldier’s had an appetite for plunder. Cornelius Scipio would have pursued Hasdrubal but for this. While Hasdrubal’s armies made ready, the Hispanian chiefs were won over by Cornelius Scipio.

11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Then happiness was achieved. Success descended upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth.

12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. Wherein were all manner of four footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. There came a voice to him, "Rise, Cornelius Scipio. Kill and destroy Carthage."

14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. Cornelius said, "Not so fast, ruler. For I have never destroyed anything that is common or unclean."

15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. The voice spoke to him again the second time, "What good moral life experiences has cleansed, that call not you common."

16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven. This was done three times (Battles of Ticinus, Trebia, Cannae). The success was received up again into happiness.

17Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate, Now while Cornelius did not doubt in himself what this message which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Hannibal had made inquiry for the lieutenant’s house and stood before the gate,

18And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there. and called, and asked whether the lieutenant, which was surnamed Cornelius, was residing there.

19While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee. While Cornelius thought on the message, common sense said to him, "Behold, three men seek you." (Hasdrubal, Mago, Gisgo)

20Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them. Rise therefore, and get you down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."

21Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius; and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come? Then Cornelius came up to the men which were sent to them from Hannibal. They said, "Behold, I am he whom you seek: what is the cause wherefore you are come?"

22And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of you. They said, "Cornelius the commander, a just man, and one that fears good moral life experiences, and of good report among all the nation of the self dependent people, was warned from good moral life experiences by a special message to send for you into his matters and to hear words of you.

23Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him. The Numidan princes Syphax and Massinissa then called Cornelius in and housed him. On the next time Cornelius went with them. Certain brethren of Rome accompanied him.

24And the morrow after they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, and he had called together his kinsmen and near friends. The next time after he entered into Roman control (205 BC was unanimously elected to consulship at age 31). Cornelius waited for them and they had called together their kinsmen and near friends.

25And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. As Cornelius was coming into Sicily, Hannibal met the Roman troops in the southwestern toe of Italy and fought them.

26But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man. Cornelius stood them up (trained soldiers in Sicily), saying, "Stand up; I myself also am a man."

27And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together. As he talked with the recruits, they came in and found many that had come together.

28And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. He said to them, "You know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a self thinker to keep company, or come to one of another nation. But good moral life experiences has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

29Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me? 29Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for. I ask therefore for what intent you have sent for me?"

30And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing, Cornelius said, "Four years ago (213 BC) I was fasting until this year. At 209 BC I earnestly offered in my matters, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,

31And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. And said, Cornelius, your earnestly offered is heard, and your donations are had in remembrance in the sight of good moral life experiences.

32Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee. Send therefore to Rome, and call here lieutenant, whose surname is Cornelius. He is lodged in the manner of one lieutenant a tanner by the sea side: who, when he comes, shall speak unto you.

33Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God. Immediately therefore I sent to yours. You have well done that your art come. Now therefore are we all here present before good moral life experiences, to hear all things that are commanded you of good moral life experiences.

34Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: Then Cornelius opened his mouth, and said, "Of a truth I perceive that good moral life experiences is no respector of persons.

35But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. But in every nation he that fears it, and works righteousness, is accepted with it.

36The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) The word which good moral life experiences sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by self dependence, the formally chosen one (it is the main ruler of all).

37That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; That word, I say, you know, which was published throughout all praise of self subsisting, and began from district, after the commitment which the grace of self subsisting preached.

38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. How good moral life experiences chose formally self-help of sanctified with common sense and with power. Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of evil. For good moral life experiences was with it.

39And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: And we are witnesses of all things which it did both in the land of the self-thinkers and in vision of peace; which they impressed strongly and hanged on a tree.

40Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; 40Him good moral life experiences raised up the third time and showed him openly.

41Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before good moral life experiences, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.

42And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. He commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was established by decree of good moral life experiences to be the Judge of quick and dead.

43To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believes in him shall receive remission of sins.

44While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. While Cornelius yet spoke these words, common sense came from all them which heard the word.

45And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. They of the spiritual purification which believed were astonished, as many as came with Cornelius, because that of the non-believers of self thinking also was poured out the gift of common sense.

46For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, For they heard him speak with tongues and magnify good moral life experiences. Then answered Cornelius,

47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? "Can any man forbid water, that those should not be committed, which have received common sense as well as we?"

48And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. He commanded them to be committed in the purpose of the ruler common sense. Then he earnestly offered them to stay for awhile.

Homily 10 Scipio the Elder (Cornelius): Scipio the Elder, source reference can be found in Plutarch Lives (Scipio Africanus, pp. 28, 152-154, 214-215, 261, 278-337, 419, 451, 505, 671-679; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323) --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Homily 20 - Scipio, the younger

Click show in right corner to display.

Chapter 20

Scipio Aemilianus Africanus

Before the uproar started in 151 BC, Scipio (the younger) volunteered his services unto the Roman senators to go to Spain. They accepted him and he came to go into military service.

Then they went through those parts and had given him recommendations. They went from Italy.

There he served the Roman government for three years (151 BC, 150 BC, 149 BC). Then the Numidians laid wait for the Carthaginians. As they were about to utter bitter complaints to violence, the Carthaginians purposed Scipio to act as a mediator.

There he accompanied the Roman officers since it was unclear as to who was defending the fatherland. Of the victory against the Carthaginians, Masinissa and second in command, Manius Manilius. Scipio, as a practical down to earth man, was sent to besiege Carthage. He was valued for his good life experiences. It was unclear as to Scipio’s legal military status, as he was under age. A special law was enacted to allow him to serve. He was well educated and suited for military duty.

These leaders staying after stayed for the Roman senators at the siege of Carthage in 146 BC as requested by the Senate.

Scipio presented in grand speeches his warlike characteristics before the time of self confidence and these went from him to astute skills in five years (151 BC - 146 BC).

Upon the first part of the event of the siege of Carthage, then the soldiers came apart in their military skills. Scipio taught to them military training skills, preparing for battle. He continued his preaching of discipline daily until nightfall.

There were some fires in the Byrsa, where a few survivors were gathered together.

There stood in a window a certain mature woman not called happy, jumped to her death. As Scipio was making a short speech, her two children were thrown to their death, and she jumped into the fire herself, and were all killed along with the Roman deserters.

Scipio came up and rose them (senators), and embracing them said, "The day shall come when sacred Troy shall fall, and King Priam and all his warrior people with him."

Then the Carthaginians therefore had gone up again, and had a treaty from the Second Punic War, and finished it, and listened a long time of 60 years, even till break of time period of treaty, so they came together again.

Scipio took the older man (Hasdrubal the Boeotarch) alive, and was given his agnomen of Africanus for heroism.

Gaius Papirius Carbo (consul 120 BC) coming after Tiberius’ death (133 BC) to irritate and agitate the conservative party by approaching Scipio intending to put him out. The senators had not yet officially made land reform an official law, taking matters into their own hands.

Then the senators met with the needs of the poor and homeless at coming near to completing as law. Gaius Papirius Carbo put the land reform laws out, going then from being pure and clean.

He uttered bitter complaints therefore and went the next time into open public speaking. The next time he went to full irritation and stayed at the goodness of the conservative party. The next time he went from glaringly offensive.

Scipio had determined to be outspoken from a desirable viewpoint, since the poor and homeless would spend time in unclear matters as to what they were able to get exactly for land. They were not hostile, and it were possible for them to be at vision of peace at the time of the 500 iugera limit of land size.

From glaringly offensive Carbo came from desirable and called the leaders of the assembly of the popular party and took matters into his own hands.

When Tiberius had gone to the poor people, they said unto him, "We know, from the last time (Lex Licinia Sextia of 366 BC) when it came into unclear matters of land distribution, before that matter it had been with us at all seasons."

Serving oneself with all humility of mind, and with little tears, and many temptations, which happened by fate to them by the lying in wait the wealthy obtained more land as time went on.

How Lex Licinia Sextia kept back nothing that was profitable unto us, but have shown us, and have taught us publicly, and from matter to matter.

Testifying both to the self-serving wealthy and also to the poor Romans, deep sorrow for past wrongdoing going for good life experiences and faith toward our ruler self-help, the formally chosen one as our self-reliance basis.

Now, behold, it goes bound in the spirit unto vision of peace, not knowing the things that shall occur to us there.

But that common sense witnessed in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions will not stay with you.

But all of these things that do move you, neither count it your life dear unto yourself, so that it might finish your course with joy, and the service in life experiences, which it has received of the ruler self-help, to testify the good news of the grace of good life experiences.

Now, behold, it knows that you all, among whom it has gone teaching the realm of good life experiences, shall see my face more.

Therefore it takes me to record this time, that it is pure from the blood of all men.

For it has not shunned to declare unto you all the good advice of good life experiences.

Give careful attention therefore unto yourselves, and to all the special group of people, over the which common sense has made you overseers, to feed the organized group of people of good life experiences, which they have purchased with their own blood.

For it knows this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in amongst ya’all, not sparing a member of this particular special assembly of people.

Also of our own selves shall men fall down, speaking wicked and corrupt things, to draw away followers from what is good and proper.

Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three wars (Punic Wars) it ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.

Now, brethren, it commends you to good life experiences, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are free from wrongdoing.

It has coveted no person's silver, or gold, or apparel.

Indeed, you yourselves know, that these skills have given you special care to your necessities, and to life experiences that were with me.

It has shown you all things, how that so laboring you ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the ruler self-help, how they said, "It is more worthy of adoration to give than to receive."

When they had thus listened, they stood up, and did not offer praise with any of them.

Carbo did not feel sorry and rose on Scipio's neck and smothered him.

He did not sorrow at all for the words which Scipio never spoke, glad that he should not see his face anymore. Carbo did not accompany him to rejecting Gracchi’s proposals.

Chapter 20

Scipio Aemilianus Africanus

(time period from about 185 BC to 129 BC)

1And after the uproar was ceased, Paul called unto him the disciples, and embraced them, and departed for to go into Macedonia. 1 Before the uproar started (151 BC), Scipio (the Younger) volunteered (his services to go to Spain) unto them the leaders (Roman senators), and accepted him, and came to go into the act of paying honor (military service).

2And when he had gone over those parts, and had given them much exhortation, he came into Greece, 2 Then they went through those parts and had given him recommendations. They went from Italy.

3And there abode three months. And when the Jews laid wait for him, as he was about to sail into Syria, he purposed to return through Macedonia. 3 There resided (served the Roman government) three years (151 BC, 150 BC, 149 BC). Then the self-motivators (Numidians) laid wait for them (Carthaginians), as they was about to rail into that draws violently, they (Carthaginians) purposed (Scipio) to go into the act of paying honor (mediator).

4And there accompanied him into Asia Sopater of Berea; and of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timotheus; and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus. 4 There accompanied them (Roman officers) into unclear as to who defends the father of weighty (fatherland). Of the victory against the Carthaginians, the best prince (Masinissa) and second (in command, Manius Manilius). An earthy man (practical) of a sting (besieged Carthage) and valued for good life experiences. Of unclear (military status as Scipio was under age), by chance (special law enacted to allow him in) and well brought up.

5These going before tarried for us at Troas. 5 These (leaders) staying after stayed for them (Roman senators) at penetrated (the siege).

6And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days. 6 He railed going into warlike before the time of self confidence and went from him to penetrated in five years (151 BC - 146 BC).

7And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. 7 Upon the first time of the event (siege of Carthage), when the followers came apart in their military skills. Scipio taught to them discipline, preparing for battle. He continued his speaking of discipline until nightfall.

8And there were many lights in the upper chamber, where they were gathered together. 8 There were some lights (fires) in the upper chamber (Byrsa), where they (a few survivors) were gathered together.

9And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead. 9 There stood in a window a certain mature woman not called happy, fell to her death. As Scipio was making a short, they (her two children) were thrown to their death, and jumped into the fire herself, and were taken down dead.

10And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him. 10 Scipio came up, and rose them (senators), and embracing them said, "The day shall come when sacred Troy shall fall, and King Priam and all his warrior people with him."

11When he therefore was come up again, and had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed. 11 Then they therefore had gone up again (Carthaginians), and had broken bread (the Second Punic War treaty), and eaten (finished), and listened a short time (60 years), even till break of time period of treaty, so they came together again.

12And they brought the young man alive, and were not a little comforted. 12 He (Scipio) took the older man (Hasdrubal the Boeotarch) alive, and was much comforted (for his courageous action).

13And we went before to ship, and sailed unto Assos, there intending to take in Paul: for so had he appointed, minding himself to go afoot. 13 He (Gaius Papirius Carbo, consul 120 BC) came after (Tiberius’ death in 133 BC) to travel, and railed (uttered bitter complaints) unto approaching, there intending to put out Scipio. For so had they (senators) not assigned officially (making land reform an official law), minding themselves to go in progress.

14And when he met with us at Assos, we took him in, and came to Mitylene. 14 Then they (senators) met with them (the poor and homeless) at coming near (to becoming law). He (Gaius Papirius Carbo) put them out (land reform laws), and went from purity.

15And we sailed thence, and came the next day over against Chios; and the next day we arrived at Samos, and tarried at Trogyllium; and the next day we came to Miletus. 15 He railed therefore, and went the next time into open (public speaking). The next time he went to full of gravel (irritation), and stayed at the goodness of the senators. The next time he (Carbo) went from glaringly offensive.

16For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost. 16 For Scipio had determined to rail by desirable, because they (poor and homeless) would spend the time in unclear (as to what they were able to get exactly for land). For they were not hostile, if it were possible for them to be at vision of peace the time of the 500 iugera (limit of land size).

17And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church. 17 From glaringly offensive he (Carbo) came from desirable and called the leaders of the assembly of the popular party (and took matters into his own hands).

18And when they were come to him, he said unto them, Ye know, from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons, 18 When he (Tiberius) had gone to them, they said unto him, "We know, from the last time (Lex Licinia Sextia) when it came into unclear (land distribution), before that matter it had been with us at all seasons."

19Serving the LORD with all humility of mind, and with many tears, and temptations, which befell me by the lying in wait of the Jews: 19 Serving oneself with all humility of mind, and with little tears, and many temptations, which happened by fate to you by the lying in wait of the self-servers (wealthy that obtained more land as time went on).

20And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house, 20 How it (Lex Licinia Sextia) kept back nothing that was profitable unto us, but have shown us, and have taught us publicly, and from matter to matter.

21Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. 21 Testifying both to the self-servers (the wealthy), and also to the Romans (the poor), deep sorrow for past wrongdoing toward good life experiences and faith toward our ruler self-help, the formally chosen one.

22And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there: 22 Now, behold, it goes bound in the spirit unto vision of peace, not knowing the things that shall occur to us there.

23Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. 23 But that common sense witnessed in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions will not stay with you.

24But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God. 24 But all of these things move you, neither count it your life dear unto yourself, so that it might finish your course with joy, and the ministry, which it has received of the ruler self-help, to testify the good news of the grace of good life experiences.

25And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. 25 Now, behold, it knows that you all, among whom it has gone teaching the realm of good life experiences, shall see my face more.

26Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. 26 Therefore it takes me to record this time, that it is pure from the blood of all men.

27For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. 27 For it has not shunned to declare unto you all the good advice of good life experiences.

28Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 28 Give careful attention therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which common sense has made you overseers, to feed the organized group of people of good life experiences, which they have purchased with their own blood.

29For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 29 For it knows this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, sparing this particular special assembly of people.

30Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. 30 Also of our own selves shall men fall down, speaking wicked and corrupt things, to draw away followers from them (what is good and proper).

31Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. 31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years it ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.

32And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. 32 Now, brethren, it commends you to good life experiences, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are free from wrongdoing.

33I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. 33 It has coveted no person's silver, or gold, or apparel.

34Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me. 34 Indeed, you yourselves know, that these skills have given you special care to your necessities, and to life experiences that were with me.

35I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive. 35 It has shown you all things, how that so laboring you ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the ruler self-help, how they said, "It is more worthy of adoration to give than to receive."

36And when he had thus spoken, he kneeled down, and prayed with them all. 36 When they had thus listened, they stood up, and did not offer praise with any of them.

37And they all wept sore, and fell on Paul's neck, and kissed him, 37 He (Carbo) did not wept sore (feel sorry), and rose on Scipio's neck and smothered him.

38Sorrowing most of all for the words which he spake, that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied him unto the ship. 38 Did not sorrow at all for the words which Scipio never spoke, that he should not see his face anymore. He (Carbo) did not accompany him unto the travel (of rejecting Gracchi’s proposals).

Homily 20 Scipio, the younger: (Scipio Aemilianus Africanus Minor, pp. 215, 223-230, 280-289, 672-689, 874; Great Books of the Western World, The Dryden Translation, University of Chicago (1952), Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-10323) --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Here is chapter 10 of Scipio Africanus, decoded. The main original source references are Livy, libri xxvi and xxxviii and in various Lives of Plutarch. Of course you did look at chapter 10 to see "Cornelius" there. AND you looked at chapter 9 line 11 and saw where it said, ...the street which is called Straight... Here also is chapter 20 of Scipio Aemilianus Africanus, decoded. The original source references are Polybius (book xxxviii part 5 "The Fall of Carthage") and in various Lives of Plutarch. Now I realize you don't like number coincidences, however notice Scipio, the elder, is chapter 10 and Scipio, the younger, is chapter 20. Now assume you ignore this, you can not ignore that all these chapters happen to be in chronological order for time periods ("Chronicle") which I provided. I would love to have you actually believe I could make this up, however we both know that I do not have that kind of knowledge. Giving you this additional material so you have something more to shred to pieces. I am not at all afraid you will be able to as I have done my homework and realize there is a system here. I have applied the keys and they work for every line. Please show me where this decoded information is not that as recorded by these ancient sources. Keep in mind that IF you can't then you have proven to me that I have found something hidden for over 600 years. It has been in front of millions of people over this time. You should easily be able to give me details and shred this to pieces IF there really is something wrong with the discovery. Notice that I have provided only a small trash container for the pieces of trash, since at best all you will be able to do is give me a few pieces that are incorrect. I can see you are obviously the smartest person on Wikipedia by far, hundreds of times smarter than myself. You have knowledge about most anything (or can find it quickly), so if anyone can shred this to pieces then it is you. By not answering my requests to e-mail me you have solved my dilemma. There is no doubt that I have found Petrarch's Chronicle of Universal History, 28 homilies - known today by a different name. It is recognized by most scholars that the New Testament has 27 books. These decoded homilies are shown with much detail line-by-line to show how each line got decoded. If you want the complete set of keys, just e-mail me. If you have any questions as to how a line got decoded, feel free to ask me as I will have the answer since I am the one and and only that decoded it. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Livy

Note that Jerome wrote only in Latin, as did Petrarch. Livy lived in or around Padua, as did Petrarch from 1368 until his death in 1374. Obviously he had access to Livy's works. This would be like setting up residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and having 24 hour access to the Library of Congress. It's no wonder much of his sourses are from Livy. He also lived 4 years in Carpentras, being a Carpentra citizen. Another favorite source of his also was Polybius. It should be noted that it can not be proven through DNA that Petrarch's body is in his tomb. Also it should be noted that no existing document or any copy thereof of Jerom'e exist today that can be proven to be written before the fourteenth century (i.e. his De Viris Illustribus) - you would be remise in your duties IF you didn't follow up on this one! --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Petrarch wrote in both Latin and Italian (and applied Provençal poetical models). He owned not one but two incomplete copies of Livy, which he was at pains to improve, annotate, emend, and complete, even transcribing text himself. Both copies survive: Bibliothèque National MS Paris Lat. 5690 and MS. Harleian 2493 in the British Library. The story of Petrarch's role in the painful partial reconstruction of Livy is examined by G. Billanovich, "Petrarch and the Textual Tradition of Livy" Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 14.3/4 (1951), pp. 137-208. Billanovich gives an outline of the piecemeal reconstruction of De urbe condita from the 14th century onwards. Livy's Paduan connection was long cold by the time Petrarch was there. Hope this helps.--Wetman (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it does! I must admit that I did not know that and it is very useful information. Like I say, I consider you an outstanding scholar - in the order of John Wycliffe - whom I happen to notice lived in the same time period as Petrarch. It is interesting to note that apparently Wyclif's Bible is the first complete translation of the New Testament into English. There are verifiable copies of the bible as early as 1382 and 1395 and into the early fifteenth century. Let me know when you come across a verifiable copy of Jerome's De Viris Illustribus before the fourteenth century - since this would be of upmost importance. Since I already know you will not be able to find such a copy, you know what I am implying. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's a late 12th century text of DVI right here in New York, in the General Theological Seminary. It was first published by William Henry Paine Hatch, "A Manuscript of Jerome's De Viris Illustribus Belonging to the General Theological Seminary in New York", Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 23 (1912), pp. 47-69. There's a work by Gennadius with the same title, and a well-known anonymous one too, sometimes formerly attributed to Sextus Aurelius Victor; an inscription on one of two mss of it at the Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore, attributes it to Pliny! unlikely. I see now that Guido Martellotti edited Petrarch's De Viris illustribus (Florence:Sansoni) 1964. You see how I am ignorant of the work. Jerome mentions his DVI in a letter. --Wetman (talk) 18:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

While I can find Harvard Studies in Classical Philology in Google Books, I don't see that particular article you speak of. I see it mentioned, however can not locate the article itself so I can read the article myself. Could you give me a link to that article? Do you know how they verified that it was of the 12th century, because of course I have my doubts. I'll try to find a way to contact someone at that seminary about that and how they happen to have come in possession of Jerome's DVI. The oldest verifiable copy I have been able to find that I have confidence in is 1470 at Niedersaechsische Staats-und Universitaetsbibliothek, Schriftliche Auskunft / Historisches Gebaeude, Papendiek 14, 37073 Goettingen.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

As you know by now I started and am the major contributor to both these articles of De Viris Illustribus (Jerome) and De Viris Illustribus (Petrarch), so have done years of research to locate the oldest available copy of Jerome's DVI. Talking to several Universities worldwide I have not been able to locate and find anything earlier than 1470. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Just sent off an email to one of the V.P.s, so should hear from them concerning this matter. Will let you know what I hear.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Doug, This manuscript is no longer owned by the General Theological Seminary, as it was auctioned off by Christie's October 1, 1980. Regarding the manuscript's provenance, the auction catalog reads: "The script which has been dated as early as the twelfth century, is more likely of the early fifteenth century." The current whereabouts of the manuscript are unknown. Regards, Patrick Slaven

Reference Librarian

St. Mark's Library

General Theological Seminary

175 Ninth Avenue

New York, NY 10011

Also started and am the major contributor to Liber sine nomine. That's the reason I know much of this subject also.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You do of course know the Greek meanings of Jerome's names Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Found it! It was right there all along in External Links of De Viris Illustribus (Jerome). Forgot about it, as they can not trace it back any further than 1849. I long since had put it out of my mind because of this. If you find any other leads, please let me know. Now, of course, you know what I am implying. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:22, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You know how Wikipedia wants references, references, references - likewise I'll need papertrail, papertrail, papertrail to be able to verify where Jerome's DVI came from. Otherwise perhaps carbon dating might be another backup - however even that gets a little shaky. DNA would be good, however I don't think it applies to objects outside animal analysis. DNA would have been good to prove that it was actually Petrarch in his tomb, however apparently the results did not prove this. Beyond that, I would say it is purely guesswork. Wyclif's Bible has an excellent papertrail, so can be verified on dates of the copies.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Funny you should bring up Wycliffe. It was you that brought him up, wasn't it? Anyway, in his article I note that there sure was a lot of events that went on with him concerning the church around 1375 to 1380. Apparently also The books and tracts of Wycliffe's last six years include continual attacks upon the papacy and the entire hierarchy of his times. Come to think of it, this sounds a lot like that of Petrarch. Petrarch supposedly died 1374. Apparently Wycliffe came out with his complete translation of the New Testament in 1382. Many say it is possible he translated the entire New Testament, while his associates translated the Old Testament. Wycliffe knew Latin well (as did Petrarch) and wrote in Middle English.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 00:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Jerome

Meanwhile here is another bit I just decoded. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:50, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Petrarch's greatest work

Click show in right corner to display.

{coded}
I, Jerome, son of Eusebius, of the city of Strido, which is on the border of Dalmatia and Pannonia and was overthrown by the Goths, up to the present year, that is, the fourteenth of the Emperor Theodosius, have written the following: Life of Paul the monk, one book of Letters to different persons, an Exhortation to Heliodorus, Controversy of Luciferianus and Orthodoxus, Chronicle of universal history, 28 homilies of Origen on Jeremiah and Ezekiel, which I translated from Greek into Latin, On the Seraphim, On Osanna, On the prudent and the prodigal sons, On three questions of the ancient law, Homilies on the Song of Songs two, Against Helvidius, On the perpetual virginity of Mary, To Eustochius, On maintaining virginity, one book of Epistles to Marcella, a consolatory letter to Paula On the death of a daughter, three books of Commentaries on the epistle of Paul to the Galatians, likewise three books of Commentaries on the epistle to the Ephesians, On the epistle to Titus one book, On the epistle to Philemon one, Commentaries on Ecclesiastes, one book of Hebrew questions on Genesis, one book On places in Judea, one book of Hebrew names, Didymus on the Holy Spirit, which I translated into Latin one book, 39 homilies on Luke, On Psalms 10 to 16, seven books, On the captive Monk, The Life of the blessed Hilarion. I translated the New Testament from the Greek, and the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and how many Letters I have written To Paula and Eustochius I do not know, for I write daily. I wrote moreover, two books of Explanations on Micah, one book On Nahum, two books On Habakkuk, one On Zephaniah, one On Haggai, and many others On the prophets, which are not yet finished, and which I am still at work upon.

{decoded}
"I, a respectful and moderate person with a sacred name being a prudent person and an excellent counselor, is from a region of My Secret (another book I wrote), which is on the border of vain brightness and on a mission in life and was overthrown by the "Goths" (Pope Clement V and associates moving to Avignon) up to the present year, that is, the year of 1374. I did write a Letter to Posterity giving my details of my life (autobiography). I wrote a Chronicle of Universal History, 28 homilies of individual chapters on persons of good moral character, which I translated from Greek into Latin ("Actions of the Illustrious Men", a.k.a. "Acts of the Apostles"). {certain ones left out due to controversy} The following books and letters I wrote also of the New Testament: Three books of Commentaries on the epistle of Paul to the Galatians, (a.k.a. I Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, and the book of "Galatians") likewise three books of Commentaries on the epistle to the Ephesians, (a.k.a. Books of Ephesians, Phillippians, and Colossians) On the epistle to Titus one book (a.k.a. "Titus"), On the epistle to Philemon one (a.k.a. "Philemon") Commentaries on Ecclesiastes, (1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians) one book of Hebrew questions on Genesis (a.k.a. "Revelation"), one book On places in Judea, (a.k.a. "Jude") one book of Hebrew names, (a.k.a. "Hebrews") Twin books on common sense, (a.k.a. 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy) the book of James the book of Romans, the book of Matthew, the book of Mark, the book of John, and a book which I translated into Latin one book, 39 homilies on Luke, On Psalms 10 to 16, seven books, (a.k.a. the seven "sayings") The saying about The Lamp The saying about asking, seeking, and knocking The saying about The Birds of Heaven The saying about The Defendant Saying about The Discarded Salt Saying about The Master and Servant Saying about Caesar's Coin On the captive Monk, The Life of the blessed Hilarion (1); being then total of 47 homilies to the "Gospel of Luke."

Further on Petrarch's greatest work

Click show in right corner to display.

Chapter 80 (Firmianus the rhetorician, surnamed Lactantius)

{coded}
Firmianus, known also as Lactantius, a disciple of Arnobius, during the reign of Diocletian summoned to Nicomedia with Flavius the Grammarian whose poem On medicine is still extant, taught rhetoric there and on account of his lack of pupils (since it was a Greek city) he betook himself to writing. We have a Banquet of his which he wrote as a young man in Africa and an Itinerary of a journey from Africa to Nicomedia written in hexameters, and another book which is called The Grammarian and a most beautiful one On the wrath of God, and Divine institutes against the nations, seven books, and an Epitome of the same work in one volume, without a title, also two books To Asclepiades, one book On persecution, four books of Epistles to Probus, two books of Epistles to Severus, two books of Epistles to his pupil Demetrius and one book to the same On the work of God or the creation of man. In his extreme old age he was tutor to Crispus Caesar a son of Constantine in Gaul, the same one who was afterwards put to death by his father.

Chapter 80 (Epistolae, the expert in the art of writing, more commonly known as Familiar Letters)

{decoded}
Epistolae, known also as Familiares, a follower of a good counselor (Petrarch), during the reign of nourished by being a self motivated thinker was summoned to Numedia (North African territory) with joyfulness the Romanician (Roman citizen) whose poem (‘Africa’) on healing is still existing, taught the art of effectively using the language of the Vulgate Latin with Italian in speech and writing there and on account of its lack of people (being of Greek origin before becoming ruins) he betook himself to writing. We have a large variety of letters of his (hundreds) which he wrote as a young man while writing of "Africa" and an "Itinerary of a journey from Africa to Numedia" (Punic Wars, especially the Second Punic War) written in hexameters (Petrarch’s famous poem book "Africa" is in hexameters), and another set of letters which is called "The Familiares" and a most beautiful one on the wrath of good and divine institutes against the notions (‘Secretum’); 7 books and an epitome of same work in one "Volume Without A Title" also known as "The Book Without A Name" (Latin: Liber Sine Nomine), also 2 books to Asclepiades (consisting of 11 letters), 1 book on persecution, 4 books of Epistles to Probus, 2 books of Epistles to Severus, 2 books of Epistles (1 John, 2 John) to his pupil (Gaius Laelius) belonging to Cornelius and 1 book (3 John) to this same pupil on the work of good morals or the creation of man. In his extreme old age (late 60’s) he was tutor to the selected Pope Gregory XI, a descendant of the previous entity (being Pope Urban V) in Gaul (Avignon, France; a.k.a. "Gaul"), the same one who was afterwards put to death by his papa. (being the Avignon "papacy", since in 1378 it was then moved to Rome where he then soon died)

"Firmianus (Lactantius)" = Epistolae Familiares

"Firmianus" has 9 letters. "Epistolae" has 9 letters.

"Lactantius" is 10 letters. "Familiares" is 10 letters.

"The Book Without A Name" = "Liber Sine Nomine" epitome of 19.

"Volume Without A Title" = an -Epitome- of 19 books of below.

COINCIDENCES:

1. "Firmmianus" has 9 letters = "Epistolae" (is 9 letters).

2. "Familiarer" has 10 letters = "Lactantius" (10 letters).

3. Total above 19 books = "Liber Sine Nomine" is epitome of 19 letters.

4. Volume Without a Title (19 letters) = 7 + 2 + 1 + 4 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 19 books.

5. "The Book Without a Name" is 19 letters which is epitome of "Epistolae".

It turns out that the word here of "book" really means "letters".

Keep in mind above books are also an "Epitome", just like Petrarch's "The Book Without A Name" of his 19 "special" letters.

"Liber Sine Nomine" is -epitome- of ‘Espistolae Familiares’.

5. Nicomedia is a reference to "Numedia" where Carthage is at.

6. Carthage just happens to be from Greek roots = "a Greek city".

7. City of Carthage of Greek roots has no people (pupils) = ruins.

8. Romanician (Roman citizen) has 10 letters just like Grammarian.

Looking at Chapter 80 closer this then connects to the New Testament this way:

2 books To Asclepiade:

There happens to be 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians. Asclepiades has 11 letters and Corinthians has also 11.

1 book on persecution:

There are following indirectly a "set" of 8 books without specific numbers.

4 books of Epistles to Probus:

Among these are a set of 4 books of "instructions" with specific numbers.

I Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians

I Timothy

2 Timothy

2 books of Epistles to Severus…..

1 Peter = note the letter "e" and letter "r" location. Key of The Petrarch Code.

2 Peter = These are letters of "instructions", being word meaning of "Epistles".

2 books of Epistles to his pupil belonging to Scipio "Cornelius" and

1 book to the same on the work of good morals or the creation of man.

Note that there are here a "complete set" of THREE letters of "Epistles".

Demetrius means "belonging to Corn" (a.k.a. "Cornelius" or short "Ceres").

Scipio Cornelius is the main character of Petrarch’s famous book "Africa".

These letters of "instructions" just happen to be on having good morals.

1 John

2 John

3 John

COINCIDENTIALLY Petrarch’s son’s name is "Giovanni" (English: "John").

Note there COINCIDENTIALLY just happens to be -19- NT books here:

1 Corinthians

2 Corinthians

Titus

Philemon

Galatians

Hebrews

Ephesians

James

Philippians

Colossians

1 Peter

2 Peter

1 Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians

1 John

2 John

3 John

1 Timothy

2 Timothy

"The Book Without A Name" just happens to have 19 letters and is an epitome.

Please tell me I am chasing phantoms and that there really are no connections on this of Petrarch's Greatest Work. You could not give me a better compliment. Now of course for me to believe you, you must use words that are convincing. You have that capability. I know as I have been persuaded by you many times before since I trust you. Then IF you actually think I can pull this off, I will be blown away. Then I will know that I no longer need to go for further education as I believe for someone to pull this off it would take more than a Harvard degree.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 15:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Jerome is Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus. Eusebius means "respectful, pious"; Sophronius means "temperate, moderate"; Hieronymus means "sacred name." I am implying Petrarch is Jerome. That's why you will never find a copy of Jerome's De Viris Illustribus before the fourteenth century, since it was written in the fourteenth century by Petrarch. That's why the "coincidence" of bio # 66 is "Cornelius", a most important figure for Petrarch. Bio # 67 is Hannibal, arch enemy of Scipio. If you look into it you will see that it was established by 1400 that there were 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 books in the New Testament = 66 books total. You may find a papertrail of the Old Testament books before the fourteenth century, however not the New Testament.

There is a Petrarch-Wycliff connection, however don't know exactly how. You can see that Petrarch's and Wycliffe's philosophy toward the papacy is very similiar. AND like I said above I note that there sure was a lot of events that went on with him concerning the church around 1375 to 1380. The Avignon papacy was moved back to Rome in 1378 - an event Petrarch wished very much. The period has been called the "Babylonian captivity", coined by Petrarch. Sounds a lot like "Avignon captivity" to me. Since DNA did not prove Petrarch died in 1374 and can not even prove it is his body in his tomb, then I have reason to believe he died shortly after 1378 instead. That's my belief. Some believe in Christianity and historical Jesus.

You now have seen that chapter 10 of Acts of the Apostles is about Cornelius. Decoded it is of Cornelius Scipio. I had no way of knowing that chapter 20 was to come out as Scipio, the younger. It turns out chapter 19 (above decoded) is Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus, the father of Scipio, the younger. I hope and pray you actually think I have this much ancient Roman knowledge to pull this off to be able to make "phantom connections" like this. Like I say, all 28 decoded chapters of Acts of the Apostles are in chronological order starting in the seventh century BC and going to the first century - involving not only ancient Roman history, but ancient Greek and the ancient Persian Empire. Please tell me that I made this up and am able to pull this off, as I believe not even a Harvard graduate could do that.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 10:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

A possible connection for Petrarch and Wycliff might be Bruges, as this is an important city that both Petrarch and Wycliffe are known to have been at. Wycliffe went to Bruges in 1374, the year Petrarch supposedly died, for a peace congress. Wycliffe was an opponent of the Avignon system, as was Petrarch. It was after this date that Wycliffe came significantly to the fore. Ultimately the Avignon papacy was moved back to Rome in 1378. Around this time Bruges was a chief commercial city of the world. There was a decree dated July 26, 1374, to remove ecclesiastical annoyances, of which Wycliffe was considered one of them. Petrarch supposedly died July 19, 1374. This same month of 1374 Wycliff was in Bruges. Some have doubts of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I fear you think I am disloyal, but I cannot help you in this.--Wetman (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Obsolutely not. You have helped me considerably. I didn't know that of Petrarch having two incomplete copies of Livy, which he was at pains to improve, annotate, emend, and complete, even transcribing text himself. This is a very important bit of information as that tells me he "transcribed" the 28 homilies of Chronicle of Universal History from Classical Latin to Vulgar Latin - the language he wrote in. This is a very important key I was never clear about before, which you helped me to clear up on my quest. I already researched this out and know both Petrarch and Wycliffe have been in Bruges - a common connection between them. Thanks again for all your help. IF you happen to come across a verifiable copy of Jerome's DVI then this blows my theory. However as much research I have already done on that and the related material I have described above, I am not afraid you will. As you can probably tell I am not a religious person. Just someone that likes to solve mysteries and I have found one that is a lot of fun to work on - because all the dots are falling into place. Its like knowing the Periodic Table exists and that certain "elements" are there because it is mathematical, but just don't know the exact details of all these "elements." I have most of the "elements", now I am just plugging in the details. My quest is to get the details, since I already know the "elements" exists. AND did I mention, its fun. Let me know if you want the Petrarch "keys" and then you can also decode the New Testament. There is some interesting stories there of Avignon and the Ascent of Mont Ventoux. OR at least you can verify what I am saying. Keep in mind I consider you the best scholar Wikipedia has and am not at all afraid you can disprove this material. You have already proved dozens of points for me and I can give you details about this if you like. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I am glad to have helped in any way. I think that Petrarch, who established many orthographic conventions and many of whose textual emendations in various works are still accepted, would have been chagrined to hear that he wrote in Vulgar Latin. The manuscript tradition of Jerome's DVI has been thoroughly worked out over the last century and more: not that I know anything about it. But you shouldn't confuse the trackable provenance of a ms with what can be securely understood of its origin by palaeographical study and examination of the ms as a documentary object.--Wetman (talk) 13:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Would like to reply to this, as then you will know I am paying attention to what you are saying and put much weight on it. Keep in mind, that I put just as much weight on what you don't say - because it speaks volumes! Understand and agree with you on not to confuse the trackable provenance of a ms with what can be securely understood of its origin by palaeographical study and examination of the ms as a documentary object. Apparently this applied to the above e-mail response from General Theological Seminary's catalog when selling Jerome's DVI in saying, ...is more likely of the early fifteenth century.." I'm not surprised to this response, as I know De Viris Illustribus (Jerome) was written in the fourteenth century, so obviously there can not be any copies before the fourteenth century.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Petrarch Code

Petrarch Code

Click show in right corner to display.

Petrarch Code keys

Hidden real meaning (ancient history) is opposite of what is written.

Key words have the opposite meaning. Example opposite words below:

I = it

us = them

his = their

their = his

we = he

he = they

they = he

him = them

them = him

him = it

towards = for

for = towards

and = but

but = and

unto = to

if = for

with = to

at = about

depart for = come to

come to = depart for

departed from = came to

came to = departed from

come from = went to

went to = come from

came into = went from

went from = came into

came down from = went up to

day = time

week = day

hour = time

night = day

ship = travel

sail = rail

sailed = railed

sailed away from = railed into

until = from

unto = for

fell on = gave to

fallen = taken

went down = came up

came up = went down

came to = went from

went from = came to

sent to = went from

went from = sent to

going before = coming after

coming after = going before

arrived at = went to

went to = arrived at

when = then

then = when

years = wars

to ship = to rail

prayer = place of offering

city = region

heard = spoke for

midnight = broad daylight

high priests = senators

brethren = people

elders = the senior ranking

church = organized group of people

synagogues = organized group of people that were self reliant

gospel = good news

baptize = committed

disciples = followers

apostles = military commanders

sabbath = special time

translate = transcribe

Greece = Italy

Italy = Greece

Athens = Rome

Rome = Athens

Caesarea = Roman control

God = good moral life experiences

Jews = people that believe in self reliance

Gentiles = non believers in self subsistence

Jesus = self-help

Christ = formally selected one, correct way to go

Lord = ruler of some type (i.e. a need),

LORD = self-ruling

Holy Spirit (Holy Ghost) = common sense

Additional key rules:

These keys will only work on KJV or earlier. They work well with the Wycliffe Bible as the KJV came from it. All "modern" bibles of later centures are just derivatives off KJV and then get too distorted with too much key information lost.

When the word "And" or "But" is in front of "they" at the beginning of a sentence then it is "they" NOT "he."

When the word "And" or "But" is in front of "when" at the beginning of a sentence then it is "when" NOT "then."

When the word "And" or "But" is in front of any set of words to the first comma, these words are not coded and stay the same; after that they are coded words.

However without these prefix words then the word is changed according to key.

The words in a quote are not coded and therefore not changed, other than the meaning behind the biblical name which still applies.

Paul is the subject of a particular chapter and is different in each chapter.

Paul is associated with something little or small or minor or subordinate, etc.

Paul = "the little one" is the same person throughout a particular chapter, however a different person for each chapter.

Peter is the subject of a particular chapter and is different in each chapter.

Peter is associated with something big, large, major, senior or superior.

Certain words with the same amount of letters represent one another, examples:

TO THE UNKNOWN GOD (15) = Repeal Oppian Law (15)

Thessalonians (13) = Carthaginians (13)

Damascus (8) = aqueduct (8)

Barnabas (8) = Corculum (8)

Caesarea (8) = Cornelia (8)

Greeks (6) = Romans (6)

Items of particular interest in the decoding process are below:

Chapter 9

In this chapter the time period is from about 340 BC to 273 BC.

In this chapter "the Lord" is "Appius" Claudis.

Saul has the biblical meaning of "ditch."

"Damascus" is "aqueduct", with both of 8 letters.

Line 11 is Appian Way, a straight street: Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight.

Line 11 "Tarsus" is the city of Tarentum (Appian Way destination). Greek it is "Taras."

Line 12 talks of Appius and his sight. It has been recorded he went blind later on.

Line 12 is Potitii family becoming extinct per Livy (ix. 29). Ananias = Potitii (8 letters).

Line 36 Tabitha is Publius (both 7 letters) and Dorcas is Decius (both 6 letters).

Line 37 Publius Decius was about to die, however had not ‘died’ yet as in KJV.

For further details and further explaining of any of the "keys", contact me.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 15:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Wetman,

Since you have helped me much in my quest, here are the Petrarch "keys" I am using to decode the material.

I tweak some of these from time to time, however most of the time they are this way and will work just fine.

I figure by you not being able to tear this decoded material to shreds, then you have automatically shown me this decoded material is good.

With the knowledge you show me daily that you have, you should not have had any problem in tearing this to shreds, IF there was something wrong with the discovery.

Also you have reference sources that I do not have (i.e. JSTOR subscription) and can research this even further than I can, which in many cases you have already done. Apparently you were not able to find anything drastically wrong with the decoded material or else you would have torn it to shreds.

I gave you a lot of material and several chapters of Petrarch's Chronicle of Universal History (aka Acts of the Apostles) and noticed that you were not able to tear it to shreds.

If you don't mind, perhaps you can leave this on your Talk Page for awhile after you archive your page - which it looks like you might be doing soon.

There probably are dozens of "lookers" that are following this or will stumble across it in the future. I'd be interested to see what they have to say - especially if they can give me outstanding reference material and details as you have been able to provide me. IF however they throw in religion or the like OR do not provide excellent detailed reference material as you have done for me, then I will ignore them.

I have provided you with all the ancient sources where I obtained the history to apply to each chapter after I figured out whom Petrarch was talking about.

Thanks again for your scholarly help. If you don't mind, let's see where this goes.............--Doug Coldwell ^talk 15:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Noticed as I am following up on the many leads you have provided, that Jerome has a Chronicon. It consists of a universal history from Chronicon (Eusebius). Here we go again, a chronological timeline - just like the one I have discovered. Noticed Darius I of Persia is in the list, just like my list I discovered. In my list he is chapter 2. I wouldn't dare say Pentecost in line 1 means the year 500 BC, but it does. Notice the time period for Darius. You have provided so many new leads, you won't believe it. One thing leads to another, to another, etc. I am having way too much fun with this discovery. The "keys" work and all I have to do is connect the dots and fill in the form (change the biblical names to its meaning). I have the "elements" and know where they are. Now I am just gathering the details and decoding (and a fairly simple Code it is).

It is always open to you if you have any further questions on my material I have discovered. I'm sure there must be some questions after you have read it over. Just ask and I will do my best to answer to the best of my ability, which for general knowledge-wise is only a fraction of what you already have. However, for simple everyday common sense logic, I can give you a run for your money. Remember, I am still looking for an honorary Harvard degree. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Acts 2 line 14: But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
{decoded}
But society’s foundation (Darius I, the Great, brother-in-law of Smerdis and grandson of Arsames, ruled 521–486 BC) stepped forth with the eleven apostles (1. Cambyses II, son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 529–522 BC;. 2. Smerdis (Bardiya), alleged son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 522 BC 3. Xerxes I, son of Darius I, ruled 485–465 BC ; 4. Artaxerxes I Longimanus, son of Xerxes I, ruled 465–424 BC ; 5. Xerxes II, son of Artaxerxes I, ruled 424 BC ; 6. Sogdianus, half-brother and rival of Xerxes II, ruled 424–423 BC ; 7. Darius II Nothus, half-brother and rival of Xerxes II, ruled 423–405 BC; 8. Artaxerxes II Mnemon, son of Darius II, ruled 404–359 BC; 9. Artaxerxes III Ochus, son of Artaxerxes II, ruled 358–338 BC; 10. Artaxerxes IV Arses, son of Artaxerxes III, ruled 338–336 BC; 11. Darius III Codomannus, great-grandson of Darius II, 336–330) and lifted up his voice and said to them: You people of the praise of the master of practiced traditions and all you that inhabit visions of peace; be this known to you and with your ears, hear my words.
{coded}
15For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
{decoded}
These are not drunken, as you suppose, for it is yet but third ruler of Achaemenid.
Wikipedia article: He reigned from September 522 to October 486 BC as the third Achaemenian King and called by some arguably "the greatest of the Achaemenid kings".

Remember I said there was ancient Persian history here. AND I looked all through my desk and only found a High school diploma.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Acts 2 line 1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
{decoding instructions: No decoding to the comma since it starts with the word "and." Next "they" is changed to "he" and "he" is equal to "it." "It" in this case is the Achaemenid Empire.}
It becomes then: When the time of 500 BC had fully come, the Achaemenid Empire was all with one accord in different places.
Wikipedia article: At the height of its power, the Iranian Achaemenid Empire encompassed approximately between 7.5 and 7.7 million square kilometers. This was the largest land mass of any ancient empire ever under one rule which contained many different countries. See the caption under the map picture with the description for 500 BC. That was an easy one. Others require a little more thinking, however here you can see the general idea and concept of the Petrarch Code and its "keys."--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

BTW, if you didn't notice in line 14 above with the names of the rulers - this just happens to be all the rulers within the Achaemenid Empire. Darius I just happens to be the third ruler. Darius III Codomannus was the last king of the Achaemenid Empire. Please tell me I already knew this knowledge ahead of time and just slipped this in here to make it match up with lines 14 and 15 - in a time period of around 500 BC ("Pentacost") to 300 BC. That would not be the truth, however I will accept an honorary Harvard degree.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

KJV: But Peter, standing up with the eleven,...
AND this is the description I said in the Petrarch Code keys" Peter is associated with something big, large, major, senior or superior. AND this is the description of Darius I in the Wikipedia article: ....called by some arguably "the greatest of the Achaemenid kings". See how the dots connect slicker-than-slick. I am having way too much fun with this.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

KJV 1:26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
{decoding using the instructions of the Petrarch Code}
They gave forth their lots. The lot fell upon the gift of the ruler. He was numbered with the eleven apostles.

1. Cyrus the Great, founder of the Persian Empire under the Achaemenid dynasty, reigned 559 BC - 530 BC.

2. Cambyses II of Persia, son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 529–522 BC;

2b. Smerdis: Smerdis/Gaumata usuper reigned as a Persian king over the whole Achaemenid Empire for seven months.

3. Darius I, the Great, brother-in-law of Smerdis and grandson of Arsames, ruled 521–486 BC;

4. Xerxes I, son of Darius I, ruled 485–465 BC ;

5. Artaxerxes I Longimanus, son of Xerxes I, ruled 465–424 BC ;

6. Xerxes II, son of Artaxerxes I, ruled 424 BC ;

7. Sogdianus, half-brother and rival of Xerxes II, ruled 424–423 BC ;

8. Darius II Nothus, half-brother and rival of Xerxes II, ruled 423–405 BC;

9. Artaxerxes II Mnemon, son of Darius II, ruled 404–359 BC;

10. Artaxerxes III Ochus, son of Artaxerxes II, ruled 358–338 BC;

11. Artaxerxes IV Arses, son of Artaxerxes III, ruled 338–336 BC;

If you think I previously had this kind of ancient Persian history knowledge and was knowledgable enough to be able to slip this into Acts 1:26 decoded, then I will accept the honorary Harvard degree and go on my merry way. Keep in mind these 28 chapters are going in a chronological timeline. I hope and pray you actually think I can pull this off. Matthias (8 letters) = Smerdies (8 letters). --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Chapter 1 of Acts of the Apostles (aka: Jerome's Chronicle of Universal History, 28 homilies) decoded turns out to be Cyrus the Great. What's fasinating about this chapter is that Petrarch describes the Cyrus cylinder to a tee. Chapters 3 through 5 are of additional ancient Persian rulers. Chapter 6 is of Alexander the Great, a Greek king. Chapter 7 is of Seleucus I Nicator. Chapter 8 is of Alexander's half brother, Philip III of Macedon and Alexander's son Alexander IV. The rest is history.........I mean, the rest is ancient history.

Noticed, so far, nobody wants to tackle this material. I can understand why. If you cann't tear it shreds, then who can? You are the best Wikipedia has (by far), not to say there aren't many other good Wikipedia scholars - there're just not as smart as you. I believe for someone to pull this off and be able to have enough ancient knowledge of ancient Persian and Greek empires, along with ancient Roman history, to make it come out correctly for 28 biographies of ancient rulers in descending chronological order placed into Acts of the Apostles as not really ancient history connections, but merely "chasing phantoms", it would take more than a Harvard graduate. Have I convinced you yet that Petrarch wrote this, OR have I earned my honorary Harvard degree? I wouldn't dare say I just looked all this information up on Wikipedia (plus the internet through Google) and used a little common sense to figure out the codes, but I did. The complete truth is I went to the local library also to get some information, however my local library is really small and there were few books I could find on ancient history. I wouldn't dare say who started that article with all the pictures, but I did. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

This discovery I have made is way too much fun. Am I allowed to have this much fun on Wikipedia? You're missing out. There is some really neat ancient history here and to see it unfold before your eyes is incredible. In the process of decoding, just now came across something very similar to the Rosetta Stone, except it was done in 239 BC and called the Canopus Stone. The invite is still there, if you want to help uncover something greater than KV62. Keep in mind, have I told you a falsehood yet? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

No, you never have, Doug.--Wetman (talk) 01:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 10:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I do believe I just came across something that nobody knows yet. Check this out with the sources you have and see what you discover. We all know Alexander the Great's father is Phillip II. His mother is Olympias. The story goes that there is a good possibility that Ptolemy I Soter is the half brother of Alexander the Great, since sources seem to indicate that Phillip II had him through a concubine named Arsinoe of Macedon. Now here is where it gets very interesting: my sources say Arsinoe and Olympias are sisters. What do your sources say? My prediction - they don't say. IF they do say this, then perhaps we should include this valuable information in Arsinoe of Macedon and Neoptolemus I of Epirus, father of the sisters. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

If Arrian is the source, he had Ptolemy's memoirs in front of him as he wrote Publically. Lagos was the father, but Arsinoe had been a concubine of Philip, and was pregnant when she married Lagos, according to John Watson M'Crindle's appendix of personnages in Ariian, The invasion of India by Alexander the Great as described by Arrian... etc (1896). Philip had so many wives, concubines and lovers, and Alexander's court historians operated such a rumor mill, and so much of the original material is lost, replaced by the Romances, well, it's hard to keep track.--Wetman (talk) 17:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yup, I do believe we are on the same track. Thanks for the follow-up. Yes, it is hard to keep track - however my source (definitely unauthorized) says Arsinoe was the "bitter" sister of Olympias. Now what I surmise from her being "bitter" is that she was the older sister of Olympias and since she was a lover of Philip, she was either promised to be the queen of Macedon OR at least was trying to seduce Philip. Philip was born in 382 BC. Wikipedia doesn't say, however I figure Arsinoe was born in 383 BC - making her 16 when she had Ptolemy. Arsinoe was dumped and passed her off to Lagus when Olympias was 7 years old. I am speculating the reason Arsinoe was "bitter" is because Olympias became the queen and she became only a concubine. Makes for an interesting story and who knows what is right - however this is the way it comes out in my decoding.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Finding further on Arsinoe, there is a good possibility that Olympias is the "aunt" of Arsinoe. That would make sense because of the age difference. Meleager is the son of Neoptolemus I of Epirus and according to above genealogy Arsinoe is the daughter of Meleager - bingo! See how much fun this is solving this discovery I have come across. Therefore another part of the Petrarch Code would be that "sister" is "niece" - exactly the style he has been following all along. Now all I need is the children of Meleager and the dots will connect. Then Arsinoe is the bitter niece as she is apparently from Royal blood and what an insult to be just a prostitute. No wonder she was married off quickly to Lagus - to save face. Just a thought....--Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Jerome's Who's Who

Who's Who

Click show in right corner to display.

1. Appius Claudius, the son of Gaius Claudius Crassus, from the territory of being quite productive, brother of a strong military commander. Himself chief of the illustrious commanders, after having been censor in 312 BC (at the age of 28) although he had not been a consul before. He taught to the scattered colonies throughout Latium and Campania to become Romanized. The believers in going around with the Campania people near the Tyrrhenian Sea, the senators approved going to war against the Samnite hill people in defense of the Campania people. The Second Samnite War pushed on to Rome’s favor by 321 BC. This year became lame to overthrow Gaius Pontius as the Romans were defeated at Caudine Forks. Appius held the consul chair there for twenty-five years until the last (in 296 BC), that is the fourteenth year of being a civil servant from which he first served in 312 BC. At Gaius Pontius’ hands the Roman soldiers received the crown of extreme humiliation being compelled to pass ‘under the yoke’ with their head towards the ground (bow) and their feet raised on high, asserting that they were worthy to be punished severely in the same manner as their ruler (the "yoke" was made of the Roman soldier’s spears, the ultimate insult). Herennius (father of Gaius) wrote two formal instructional letters which are called of extreme opposites, the second of which, on account of its extreme difference from the first in style, was considered by Gaius not to be by his father. Then too the good news according to politeness, who was his leader and interpreter, is ascribed to Gaius. On the other hand, the Roman history books, of the actions, good news, teachings, revelation and judgment are rejected as the true historic picture since buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way the defeat is regarded with reverence by the whole world (Roman historians distorted the true picture of the defeat).

2. Ptolemy I Soter (ruler of Egypt 323 BC - 283 BC), who is called the half-brother of Alexander the Great, surnamed the upright (title was with an "I"), the son of additional by another wife (Phillip II’s son by his concubine), as some think, but, as appears to me, the son of bitter sister of the mother of our ruler of whom the grace of self-subsisting makes mention in his book, after our ruler’s passion at once to decree by the military commander overseer of vision of peace, became a bodyguard for Alexander the Great, which is reckoned among the seven somatophylakes. Even this of being half-brother of Alexander the Great is claimed by some to have been published as a later myth fabricated to glorify the Ptolematic dynasty, and gradually, as time went on, to have gained authenticity. Molossians who lived near the illustrious military commanders age, in the fifth book of its commentaries (305 BC), writing of Ptolemy, says "After the military commanders, Ptolemy I Soter, the half-brother of the ruler surnamed the upright ("I"), was made head of both the Ptolematic Kingdom and the Ptolematic Dynasty. Many indeed are called Ptolemy (Ptolemy I-IV, VI-VIII, XII-XIII, et al). This one ("I") was holy from his mother’s womb. He drank neither wine nor strong drink, ate no flesh, never shaved or anointed himself with ointment or bathed. He alone had the privilege of entering the Holy of Holies, since indeed he did not use woolen vestments but linen and went alone into the temple and prayed in behalf of the people, to such an extent that his knees were reputed to have acquired the hardness of camels’ knees." They say also many other things, too numerous to mention. Additional also in the 20th book of its antiquities (1. Ptolemy II Philadelphus · 2. Ptolemy Keraunos · 3. Meleager · 4. Ptolemy III Euergetes · 5.Ptolemy IV Philopator · 6. Ptolemy V Epiphanes · 7. Ptolemy VI Philometor · 8. Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator · 9. Ptolemy VIII Physcon · 10. Ptolemy IX Lathyros · 11. Ptolemy X Alexander · 12. Berenice III · 13. Ptolemy XI Alexander · 14. Ptolemy XII Auletes · 15. Cleopatra V · Berenice IV · 17. Ptolemy XIII · 18. Ptolemy XIV · 19. Cleopatra VII Philopator · 20. Ptolemy XV Caesarion). Merciful in the 7th of their outlines (1. Psamtik I · 2. Necho II · 3. Ahmose II · 4. Nepherites I · 5. Nectanebo I · 6. Alexander the Great · 7. Ptolemy I) mention that on the death of Alexander III who reigned over the praise of self-support our chief was sent by Lagus as the Greek successor. After Egypt had reached their province of Cyrenaica, Ptolemy I as satrap of Egypt, Cleomenes of Naucratis the former satrap now as Ptolemy’s deputy, taking advantage of the state of anarchy, did not assemble a council and without authorization forced Cyrenaica to admit that the formally chosen way is the result of good moral life experiences. Then they accepted Ptolemy’s decree of them to be annexed. Directed up to the Ptolemaic dynasty, their legs broken, but still half alive, raising their hands to heaven they said, "Ruler forgive them for they know not what they do." Then struck on the head by the club of a fuller - such a club as fullers are accustomed to wring out garments with - their independence died. Magas of Cyrene records the tradition that this Ptolemy was of so great sanctity and reputation among the people that the downfall of vision of peace was believed to be on account of his death. He it is of whom Magas of Cyrene writes to those in white that "No one else of the military commanders did I see except the Ptolemy I Soter the half-brother of the ruler Alexander," and shortly after the event the Acts of the apostles (acts of the military commanders) bear witness to the matter. The good news also which is called the good news according to the descendants of one that passes, and which I have recently transcribed into Italian and Latin and which also that rejoices often makes use of, after the account of the resurrection of Ptolemy I says, "but the ruler, after he had given his grave clothes to the servant of the priest, appeared to Ptolemy (for Ptolemy had sworn that he would not break substance from that time in which he drank the cup of the Ptolemaic dynasty until he should see it rising again from among those that sleep)" and again, a little later, it says ""Bring a table and substance," said the ruler." And immediately it is added to the Ptolemaic kingdom, "He brought substance and blessed and broke and gave to Ptolemy I and said to him, "my brother eat your substance, for the son of man is risen from among those that sleep."" And so Magas of Cyrene reigned the organized group of people of vision of peace 30 years (280 BC - 250 BC) and was reabsorbed by the Ptolemaic Egypt. Its name of Cyrenaica was not known until taken over by the Roman Republic and the end of Ptolemy Apion’s reign. Some of our writers think it was buried in prosperity, but they are mistaken.

3. Seleucus I Nicator, also called associated with him, military commander and previously the king’s page, developed a reputation as an assistant to Alexander the Great for the sake of those going around who believed his ways. This was afterwards transformed into the Greek Hellenistic period and by what person that developed this is certain to have come from Alexander. The Greek lifestyle that passed itself has been preserved until the present day in the organization of people at Roman control which a nation made up of every tribe so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the large quantity of Greek philosophy and styles described to me by the offspring of many who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Diadochi, whether on its own account or in the person of its ruler Seleucus quotes the testimony of Alexander’s former empire it does follow the authority of the translators of the successors and the ways of Alexander the Great. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt the Ptolemaic Kingdom have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Seleucid."

Found another list of Jerome's Who's Who that has not been discovered yet by anyone else. It also can be decoded by using the Petrarch Code. The short biographies listed consists of a dozen dozen minus Desmite. Desmite doesn't really belong there and should be removed from the total list. Wouldn't dare say that the sum of the biographies of the Chronicle of Universal History and Boccaccio's Famous Women (which is known to have been based on Petrarch's work) is the amount of biographies in this work, but it is. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mythographus Homericus

Hello! Your submission of Mythographus Homericus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Problem: the text is still short. ++Lar: t/c 02:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Stefano Bardini

On September 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stefano Bardini, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:NFromentBurningBush1476.jpg

File:NFromentBurningBush1476.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:NFromentBurningBush1476.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:NFromentBurningBush1476.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 03:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Étienne Soulange-Bodin

On September 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Étienne Soulange-Bodin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 05:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Toussaint-Samat

Hello, Wetman. You might want to take a look at my comments on the reliability of Toussaint-Samat under History of coffee. --macrakis (talk) 17:46, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Poor Robin

I found myself merging Poor Robin's Almanack, a sub-stub, into Poor Robin that you created. There seems a fair amount to do in checking out the various sources, and tracing the later history. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. I wish you could do something similar to Aesop and Aesop's Fables. It is not encyclopedic thinking to have a separate article for an individual whose identity is inseparable from the attributed text, as with Poor Robin's Almanack and Poor Robin ...and Aesop.--Wetman (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

do you know how to delete a category that's just, uh, wrong?

Wetman, Not sure why I come to you for this, only that I hope you'll also see it as nonsense and know what to do. I don't know the proper way to propose deletion of a category. I wanted to use the deletion template for "nonsense," but evidently my definition of nonsense is too impressionistic. I refer you to Category:Ancient Roman-writing philosophers. What does "Roman-writing" mean? Please don't tell me it means Latin — well, calming down a bit, I guess then the issue would be renaming to the cumbersome "Ancient philosophers who wrote in Latin." If one must. There are some general issues pertaining to category-creation from this editor that I think you may have addressed earlier. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't struggle over Wikipedia Categories, Cynwolfe. The only real use of a category, for the Wikipedia reader, is as an index: the creation of a myriad of the minutest possible indices each with two or three items in them suffices to keep idle minds busy, but shouldn't detain you. Putting a category up for a "vote" by the kind of people who like to vote on things, is an exercise in futility. Categories should be displayed at the bottom of pages, where they may be permitted to run luxuriantly and self-indulgently to seed. --Wetman (talk) 15:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Phooey - CFD is this way - it's not hard as templates go. Johnbod (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Engraved gem

I have just started this, having cleared out a very weak "Ancient glypic Art" or something. It should be up your street, I think? Any help welcome. Johnbod (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

What a minefield! Ten Renaissance or post-Renaissance fakes to every genuine one. Plus the "signatures" added to good ones. Oi! I'll have a look, and add some stuff like Philipp von Stosch's Gemmae antiquae caelatae if it's not yet in. --Wetman (talk) 18:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Hapax legomenon

Hi there. I regard as uncivil your description of my request for citations as "clownish". The examples are assertions which should be verifiable, just like every other assertion made in this encyclopedia. I'm not interested in edit warring, so I'll not re-insert the cn tag without giving you a chance to explain your reason for removing it. Best regards, Timberframe (talk) 18:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I certainly had no idea that the demands had been made by such a very noble and serious Wikipedian. Had I but known I would never have dared suggest that a demand for a citation for the statement "Some examples of hapax legomena in a given language or body of work are: was clownish.--Wetman (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The thing about the written word is that tone of voice doesn't come across. Maybe you could consider enhancing your response with some form of markup such as: <sarcasm>...</sarcasm>.

<Brass tacks>Check the article's recent history: someone tagged each example which someone else objected to and the upshot was to tag the opening line once rather than overtagging the section. The fact remains that the each given example makes an assertion and in line with WP:V they should be verifiable by reference to reliable sources in which they may be found. That's the substance of the recent edits and </Brass tacks><slightly bitchy>it won't go away because you can pick holes in the precice location of the cn tag.</slightly bitchy> <humour but with a serious unlying purpose>Now, if you could furnish some citations, that would be a great step forward.</humour but with a serious unlying purpose> <dashes>--</dashes> <squiggles>Timberframe (talk) 18:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)</squiggles>