Talk:List of Ancient Roman Collegia

Needs a lot of work

The idea of having a list of collegia is potentially a good one, but this has a number of problems (even taking into account that it's just been created):

• Poor sources: the main source for this page is over 100 years old and out of date. Other sources are not from the field.
• The intro is about as long as the main page on collegium. Merge it?
• The Latin is awful. Therefore either the source is bad, or the article needs an expert.
• Incorrect information, e.g., there was no such thing as the collegium Bacchus (bad Latin aside).

- Eponymous-Archon (talk) 02:17, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am not sure if you have been altogether fair in this assessment. But more importantly, I am sorry to see you have not chosen to give a good faith view on the matter. To respond to some of your points, the majority of the sources are not "poor", insofar as they are from Oxford University, Cambridge University, and two published professors in the 21st century; one being an authority in Latin scripture at the University of Toronto and one an authority on collegia in the Eastern Roman Empire at the Academy in Athens. In terms of the sources not being from the field, I am not sure what else to say on the matter. As for one source being over 100 years old, this is certainly true, the author being this gentleman: William Dwight Porter Bliss. In the mean time, if anyone would like to help update the information with more recent sources that would be most welcome. If the source is poor, in terms of the Latin originating from that particular source, this is a very valid criticism, harshness aside. The Latin that you allude to comes indeed from that source, and not from anywhere else.

As to the incorrect information, there was actually a Collegium dedicated to Bacchus. This is documented in multiple works of Roman legislation. The collegium was banned twice and is documented in several articles that can be found in the JSTOR, one of which is clearly cited from the professor at the Academy in Athens that wrote a recent work on collegia in ancient Rome. Most of the Gods did indeed have a collegium, often several throughout the Empire. I don't know what else to say on the matter other than it's factually documented in published academic articles. If you do not believe these professors are correct, I would certainly appreciate third party, verifiable, notable sources that would define why collegia did not exist for particular gods and why the published academics that say that there were such things are wrong. I'm not sure how strong an argument it is just to say something didn't exist and poison the well dismissing academic sources. Thank you kindly. (Belshay (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC))

First, WP:AGF. As to the content, I'm generally a fan of list pages, but given that the intro here is about as long as that on the main page on collegia, and that the list itself isn't very long, I wonder whether it shouldn't be merged with the main page (which needs some TLC too). That aside, a 19th-century source is generally going to be out of date (even in Classics), and shouldn't be cited unless it has somehow remained authoritative (rare) or is used for historical purposes. Neither applies here. The main source from 1898 (a) is on the labor movement; (b) written by someone not by an expert in this field; (c) contains about 3 pages on Roman material. On Bacchus, first note the comments by Arnaoutoglou on the first page about using 19th c sources, but there is a broader question on whether every association (like those of the Bacchanals) should be called a collegium. The sources don't actually call the ones of the early second century by that title. (It's actually a good question whether the page on collegia should be altered to include associations of all types.) In any case "collegium Bacchus" is poor Latin. On the cited sources, only two are by Classicists, but there are lots of good sources for Roman social history and law. - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 12:33, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Latin

I have contacted several Wikipedians in the Wikiproject requesting their possible assistance with the Latin, in response to Eponymous-Archon. In the mean time, I will continue researching additional secondary source material. (Belshay (talk) 04:14, 11 April 2016 (UTC))

As an update, I have verified that the "Collegium Dianae et Antinoi" is the correct Latin phrase, according to Dr. Andreas Bendlin's (2011) article on the updated translation of a marble two column monument about the collegium. The original Latin is recorded in the article, and matches that listed in both the 1898 source and the 2011 source.(Belshay (talk) 06:38, 11 April 2016 (UTC))

Requested merge 9 June 2016

Merge: List of Ancient Roman Collegia → Collegium (ancient Rome) – Here there is a reasonable 3 paras, half-a-screenful, of intro, and then a table with only 16 members. This is longer than the actual article Collegium (ancient Rome), and largely contains different info. There is no reason for there to be a "list", which drastically reduces views. Johnbod (talk) 03:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

• Note comment by Eponymous-Archon 2 sections above "I'm generally a fan of list pages, but given that the intro here is about as long as that on the main page on collegia, and that the list itself isn't very long, I wonder whether it shouldn't be merged with the main page" (actually the intro text here is a good deal longer). Johnbod (talk) 03:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Agree that this should be merged into the Collegium (ancient Rome) page. (And again, needs a lot of work too.) - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 22:47, 9 June 2016 (UTC)