Talk:Compitalia
 | A fact from Compitalia appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 June 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date of Compitalia
editThe article states: "Cicero[16] [relates] that it fell on the Kalends of January; but in one of his letters to Atticus[17], he speaks of it as occurring on the fourth before the Nones of January." Since the kalends of January is 1 January, and the nones of January is 5 January, wouldn't the fourth day before the nones of January be the same as the kalends of January? --Bob
- When they counted backwards, they included the day they were counting back from. So, 4 days before January 5th is 5, 4, 3, 2 -- the 2nd of January. January 3rd is 3 days before the nones: 5, 4, 3. More info here. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-20 21:34
- Seems wrong. Other modern scholars are saying the typical date was 3 January, so someone's quote or math is off somewhere. — LlywelynII 09:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
The words which announced the feast
editare known to us from two sources, but if they are short enough, why not transcribe them here? Chris CII 21:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Secondary source material lacking
editA rewrite's imminent, as and when I can get around to it. The article relies almost entirely on primary source material; the use of such is fine, but it should be critically filtered through secondary scholarship. Some of the latter's already been placed by some useful soul as a reference list, untapped as yet. I'll use some of that, but will mostly draw on the sources I've used in rewriting Lares. Crits (hypercrits, even) will be welcome as ever. Haploidavey (talk) 22:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Sources for future article correction/expansion
editThe article previously ended with this laundry list. "Further reading" sections are almost always a bad idea and the intent was to use them to expand the article anyway:
- <!--The following sources were NOT used to prepare this article and are listed for those who would like to modernize the article or read more-->
- *Ittai Gradel, ''Emperor Worship and Roman Religion'' (Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 117 ff., limited preview [https://books.google.com/books?id=_ilkK4jvNjIC&dq=Compitalia&pg=PA117 online.]
- *Celia E. Schultz, ''Women's Religious Activity in the Roman Republic'' (University of North Carolina Press, 2006), pp. 13 ff., limited preview [https://books.google.com/books?id=42riYcllwsYC&dq=Compitalia&pg=PA13 online.]
- *Richard C. Beacham, ''Spectacle Entertainments of Early Imperial Rome'' (Yale University Press, 1999), pp. 55ff., limited preview [https://archive.org/details/spectacleenterta0000beac/page/55 <!-- quote=Compitalia. --> online.]
- *[[Ray Laurence]], ''Roman Pompeii: Space and Society'' (Routledge, 1996), especially pp. 39 ff., limited preview [https://books.google.com/books?id=MzU2cIWIZKwC&dq=%22magistri+vici%22&pg=PA39 online.]
- *John Bert Lott, ''The Neighborhoods of Augustan Rome'' (Cambridge University Press, 2004), especially pp. 37ff., limited preview [https://books.google.com/books?id=8nd0aDXbOSkC&dq=%22magistri+vici%22&pg=PA53 online.]
- *Tesse Dieder Stek, ''Sanctuary and Society in Central-Southern Italy'' (Ipskamp PrintPartners, 2008) http://dare.uva.nl/document/121455
These should obviously be reformatted to use {{citation}} or a similar template without bizarrely and needlessly identifying hypertext links as "online". Ideally, they should only be restored to the page once they are being used to helpfully source some point in the article. — LlywelynII 09:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)