Jump to content

Talk:Septimius Severus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleSeptimius Severus has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 25, 2018Good article nomineeListed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 9, 2004, April 9, 2005, April 9, 2006, April 9, 2007, February 4, 2012, February 4, 2014, April 14, 2015, February 4, 2021, April 9, 2023, and April 9, 2024.


troop numbers conflict

[edit]

lead - 50,000 (with citations) body - 40,000 (with citations) - needs to be resolved. I suggest the smaller estimates be used as this was oversea and not just a land troop transport.50.111.19.37 (talk) 02:19, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

Someone just changed the image in the infobox. Can we revert to the old one? Current image has terrible contrast - black foreground vs dark blue background. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 18:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to have been fixed by USer:T8612. Tarl N. (discuss) 20:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's a mistake in the caption for the image of Legio XIV Gemina Martia Victrix in that it refers to the Legion as Legio XIIII, which in Roman numerals I'm pretty sure Fourteen is represented as XIV not XIIII. I would edit the image myself but I'm not sure how to edit captions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.41.63 (talk) 09:22, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If look closely at the image, XIIII is exactly what is on the coin. The practice of "IV" instead of "IIII" was not strictly required at the time. Tarl N. (discuss) 18:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. I guess ignore me then — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.41.63 (talk) 09:18, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is this r?

[edit]

emperor Antoninus Pius r. 138–161. His mother's ancesto 2600:6C51:7FF0:350:7049:99D6:16E5:FBA8 (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

reigned? 2600:6C51:7FF0:350:7049:99D6:16E5:FBA8 (talk) 17:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is the Wikipedia abbreviation for reign. If you open up the article's edit page, you will see this "reign|138|161" Oatley2112 (talk) 21:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Racially 'weird'

[edit]

From the text: "Due to Severus being born in North Africa, recent years have occasionally seen him mischaracterised as racially African".

There is no African race! It might be more accurate to state persons of the Niger-Congo and Bantu races have sought to infer Severus was black (i.e. visually like them). These races at the time were ensconced in West Africa south of the Sahara and were not in the general purview of the Romans. 2001:8003:70F5:2400:9107:C71E:CFB9:9AAE (talk) 15:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, not only is there no "African race", but also there are no races at all – at least in biology; but racial classifications are used legally and to some extent in sociology and history. The text is simply trying to say that Septimius' ancestors (as far as we know them) came from Europe and Western Asia, and he had no deep ancestry anywhere in Africa, even in the north.
And of course, in antiquity, the modern notion of "race" was unknown anyway. At most, Septimius may have considered himself something like "of Phoenician stock" in addition to Roman, but large continent-based ethnic labels were alien to the ancients.
One complication that has never been addressed so far on this talk page is that there is not only black, white and mixed-race as possible alternatives in these classifications, there are also ethnic groups such as Arabs, who are not considered Black nor mixed-race, but neither are they consistently accepted as white in Europe (even if they were traditionally classified as "Caucasoid"), given their origins well outside Europe. (Depending on the agenda of individual writers, Arabs may sometimes be subsumed under "whiteness", much like Egyptians are widely appropriated for it, but everyday practice and the widespread Anti-Arab racism proves their position is at best ambiguous. Let's not forget that most Asians, Oceanians and indigenous Americans are neither black, white nor mixed-race.) Rather, these ethnic groups (also Berbers, by the way) are best classified as brown in this framework. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:39, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of Septimius Severus

[edit]

Hello again @Remsense, please share your peer reviewed articles on the Punic origins of septimius severus to explain the recent undo edit . Lobus (talk) 14:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Berber descent

[edit]

user:Remsense, I'm trying to understand what's faulty about the edits of User:Lubatchovsky, as you signaled here. I mean, the DUE part is one thing (and I don't see why in this case his partly Berber heritage would not be relevant), but there's also this by User:Soidling, "not peer reviewed scholarly source". You reverted to that edit without explaining so I think you agree with that assessment, but thenn there's the sourcing: the two sources cited in Soidling's revert seem to be decent to me. Soidling, can you explain? Drmies (talk) 14:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that was a total mistake on my part. Frankly, I do not know how I did that. Apologies, thanks for pointing it out. Remsense ‥ 论 14:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources provided [1][2][3][4] are all scholarly articles from 1967, 2001, 2021, 2022, [1] in particular is a peer reviewed and discusses the clear origins of Severus and the severan dynasty very clearly. @Remsense has allowed himself to remove well sourced material from 3 articles Severan dynasty, Septimius Severus and Geta (emperor). this correlates to Wikipedia:NPOV bias editing and disruptive editing. Lobus (talk) 14:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lobus, let's not jump to accusations immediately, thanks. No need for bold print either. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, unfortunately we have to toss out Boutammina (2020) immediately, as it was clearly published at an on-demand publishing house, meaning it is self-published and not a reliable source. Likewise, Éditions du Rocher does not appear to be a publishing house with any particular experience or editorial expertise in the field of history or ethnology, or really non-fiction generally, and Bernard Lugan appears to be a figure whose academic scruples are the matter of serious dispute. That leaves Comevin and Arnaud-Lindet. Two sources is clearly better than one, but the fact remains to my eyes that the vast majority of sources I've seen do not describe the Severans as Berber, but rather as Punic or generally as North African.
I would prefer you reflect for a moment, as your tone has gotten suddenly confrontational in a way I don't feel is deserved—you are not entitled to have your additions published on the encyclopedia unless they conform to its content policies. This is essentially BRD, an extremely common cycle where additions are scrutinized when they are not immediately accepted by other editors. Your tone shift is especially concerning given the recent IP reverts, which I now feel I have to directly ask whether they were you. That would be totally unacceptable sockpuppetry. Remsense ‥ 论 15:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Remsense, let's leave out the sock accusations, okay? I understand why you thought about it, but I can tell you there is no ground for the assumption. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 16:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you would like to be a Wikipedia:Third opinion to avoid escalation of the problem, I would agree to do so If @Remsense also agrees to do so. Lobus (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorting out scholarly sources is [[WP:NPOV]], you must learn how to be neutral when it comes to sources especially those from scholars in the universities of Michigan and the University of Paris, self-published sources of Scholars that undergo Editorial process can be included as reliable. if the issue at hand is the dubuous nature of 2 sources according to your claim then why undo the whole thing without keeping 2 reliable sources and asking for alternative sources for the "unreliable" sources ? the matter at hand is a clear [[WP:NPOV]]. Bernard Lugan is a french historian who has underwent serious work on shedding light on the roman dynasties of the period and it is again another [[WP:NPOV]] that you consider his works dubiousas he does not reflect your sentiments on the origins of the dynasty in what you call "Punic of Origin" without providing your own sources, if you still claim that they are punic, share your sources.
As in regards of my tone, I am very calm about the matter, from your comment 1 on my talk page you emphasized that the problem with the articles is MOS:ETHNICITY which stipulates that the ethnic origins of a character should not be put in the lead of the article if not relevant, so I moved the ethnic sources outside the lead 2 and you still undid the edit, which showcases a lack of collaboration on your part, it is apparent that you do not want the information added whatsoever, this is indicated by a series of removals of information across several articles, although your behaviour is dubious I am still engaging with talk on the matter, other editors have made it clear that your undoing of added information is opened also in another talk page but ofcourse it all falls on deaf ears.
also now accusations that I am using a different IP address are serious, the matter will be settled here otherwise the case will be escalated as per normal procedure if you do not want to cooperate, so I am asking you for the final time to share your reliable sources on the punic origins of the dynasty otherwise things will take a turn. Lobus (talk) 15:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
If you're not the IP, you would have no problem restoring the previous status quo version of the article as policy presently requires. If you can't, there's not much I can really do but treat it as you leveraging a fait accompli on the matter, which is technically indistinguishable from you being them in practice. Please restore the consensus version of the articles, or I will have to take this to WP:ANI, given all the ancillary context of you turning immediately to accuse me of bad faith for starting a completely ordinary WP:BRD process. You are not entitled to have your additions published against consensus. Remsense ‥ 论 15:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You did not follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and skipped steps in that article to revert. If you would like to escalate the matter please do so as you have completely destroyed all attempts to resolve the issue with civility. Lobus (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You were bold, I reverted, we're meant to now discuss. This is your final opportunity to restore the consensus version of the articles so we can properly do that before I have to seek outside remedy, unfortunately. Remsense ‥ 论 15:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK stop it, both of you. Thanks. Let's talk content and sources, not the other things. Drmies (talk) 16:04, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    this is my initial request from many moons ago, if @Remsense wants to resolve the issue he needs to present peer reviewed scholarly sources for discussion Lobus (talk) 16:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My nerves are already a bit shot. I repeat the onus is on you to prove it is the mainstream view, not mine to prove it is not. If Arnaud-Lindet, Lugan, and Comevin are the only representatives of this opinion, then it's a flat no.
    Most reliable sources present Septimius and his dynasty either as Punic, or merely as North African, and it's not close. A search of Google Books, Google Scholar, or another academic database shows the paucity there, so I will only briefly collate given I am now unsure I can convince anyone of anything anyway[5][6][7][8][9][10][11]Remsense ‥ 论 16:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    None of the mentioned publications are peer reviewed
    Birley, Anthony Richard (1999). Septimius Severus. London: Psychology Press. p. ix : states clearly the libyan ethnic background of septimius severus and states so very clealy in the page, therefore your own source contradicts you.
    Birley, Anthony R. (2016). "Septimius Severus, Lucius, Roman emperor, 193–211 CE": another source by the same author establishing the libyan lineage of Septimius severus again another source contradicts your claims.
    Jerary, M. Tahar (2008). "SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS THE ROMAN EMPEROR": in his book the author mentions that the inscriptions found at Lepcis Magna were Libyan, Latin and Punic, the author did not specify from which ethnic background Severus was besides the fact that he was African and a Local.
    Barnes, T. D. (1967). "The Family and Career of Septimius Severus". Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte.: here the author only mentions the "Africanness" of Septimius as well as his origins from Lepcis as a native but no more about his ethnic background, she calls on examining his ancestry but does not state it whatsoever.
    Ermatinger James : the publisher ABC-CLIO primarily targets educational and general audiences, and its publications are not typically categorized as peer-reviewed academic works, the publication on the page mentions he spoke Punic, Greek, and Latin, the latter with a slight accent.
    Barett: He mentions that Severus has a Punic background as do my sources, Severus spoke Punic well and latin with a punic accent as per my sources but the author does not recognize severus as Punic, most Libyans at the time spoke punic as well as their native language. his work is one of the only few non peer-reviewed works by the publishing house.
    Edelmann-Singer, B. (2024). "Nothing New in the East?": talks about his ability to speak punic but nothing about his ethnic background. her publication
    In conclusion:
    you have not read any of the sources you provided, you have not examined the writing within the publications and you did not bother to know anything about the publications or the authors themselves, the publications go against you to instate the Libyan Ethnic roots of Septimius Severus, while other publications merely mention his ability to speak Greek latin and Punic but does not dive into his ethnic roots, other publications mention him just as a native of north africa. Lobus (talk) 18:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This came over to WP:RS/N and from my review of the sources, one of the four is unambiguously a reliable source, one is probably reliable but is quite aged, one is definitely not a WP:RS because it's WP:SPS and one is likely reliable but appears only to make passing mention of Septimus. I recommended that the reliable source be used with attribution and in accordance with WP:DUE. Having made that recommendation I'm going to put this on my watchlist for a while.
    With that said I want to make two things clear:
    1. The sources I reviewed are sufficient to include an attributed claim that some scholars believe Septimus was of Berber descent.
    2. They are insufficient to say in wiki voice that he was of Berber descent. Simonm223 (talk) 18:34, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would also recommend that people pay attention to WP:AGF and WP:NPA. This is a general and non-directed recommendation. Simonm223 (talk) 18:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b Cornevin, Robert (1967). Histoire de l'Afrique (in French). Payot.
  2. ^ Boutammina, Nas E. (2020-11-05). Sur la piste des Berbères (in French). BoD - Books on Demand. ISBN 978-2-322-25652-5.
  3. ^ Lugan, Bernard (2021-02-24). Histoire de l'Egypte: Des origines à nos jours (in French). Editions du Rocher. ISBN 978-2-268-10528-4.
  4. ^ Arnaud-Lindet, Marie-Pierre (2001). Histoire et politique à Rome: les historiens romains IIIe siècle av. J.-C.-Ve siècle ap. J.-C (in French). Editions Bréal. p. 234. ISBN 978-2-84291-772-2.
  5. ^ Barnes, T. D. (1967). "The Family and Career of Septimius Severus". Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte. 16 (1). Franz Steiner Verlag: 87–107. ISSN 0018-2311. JSTOR 4434969.
  6. ^ Birley, Anthony R. (2016). "Septimius Severus, Lucius, Roman emperor, 193–211 CE". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Classics. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.5836. ISBN 978-0-19-938113-5.
  7. ^ Jerary, M. Tahar (2008). "SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS THE ROMAN EMPEROR, 193-211 AD". Africa: Rivista trimestrale di studi e documentazione dell’Istituto italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente. 63 (2). Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO): 173–185. ISSN 0001-9747. JSTOR 25734499.
  8. ^ Birley, Anthony Richard (1999). Septimius Severus. London: Psychology Press. p. ix. ISBN 0-415-16591-1.
  9. ^ Edelmann-Singer, B. (2024). "Nothing New in the East?". In Hoffmann-Salz, Julia; Heil, Matthäus; Wienholz, Holger (eds.). The Eastern Roman Empire under the Severans. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. p. 205. ISBN 978-3-647-30251-5.
  10. ^ Barrett, A. A. (2009). Lives of the Caesars. Wiley. p. 206. ISBN 978-1-4443-0296-7.
  11. ^ Ermatinger, James W. (2018). "Severan Dynasty". The Roman Empire. Vol. 2. Santa Barbara, CA: Bloomsbury. p. 233. ISBN 978-1-4408-3809-5.

Lobus, I think I'm here mostly as an admin, trying to stop an edit war and to prevent this from becoming all too personal, but I'm also an academic and I know a bit about sources. I'll give you my opinion: no, the Boutammina book is out: it's published on demand, and it would never hold up at WP:RSN, though you are welcome to try. I can't even find easily who the author is and what their affiliation is. The other books are, I suppose, fine, in general, but that's the problem: they are general histories and in a case of conflict like we have here, I think most Wikipedians (and certainly most academics) would agree that we need to see up to date specialized studies/discussions, from journal articles or monographs that are really on the subject of this article. I also think that Lugan is problematic. Perhaps the best thing for you to do is to propose these sources at WP:RSN. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My sources are valid under WP:RS as they meet the standards for verifiability and reliability where perhaps if I had to concede maybe one source could be taken as somewhat unreliable in the worst case. In a dispute where the opposing party provides no sources, there is no justification for holding my edits to an even higher standard without evidence to contest them, to share monographs and journal articles is for a user who provides high quality counter sources to prove their point. While I do welcome discussions about the quality of sources, Wikipedia policy dictates that content with valid sources should remain unless explicitly refuted with equally reliable and contradictory sources. I suggest the opposing editor provide such evidence before questioning my edits. Lobus (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really want to delve into "Punic": one thing at a time. Two editors have reverted you because, they claim, your sources aren't strong enough; the tit-for-tat of "neither are yours" is not productive. What you can do, as I suggested, is take this to WP:RSN and seek consensus for a. the quality of the sources and perhaps b. the appropriateness of those sources to support this content. If editors on RSN agree with you (on both points, preferably), then you pretty much have a green light. Conversely, you can challenge the "Punic" thing, for starters here on the talk page, but PLEASE do that separately. I have some practical experience in these matters and I'm offering you a path that is most likely to not conflate the issues and to not lead to more antagonism. Drmies (talk) 16:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your output @Drmies, will do. I am not arguing for the punic origins of Severus just his Libyan berber origins and his dynasty. if the other user wants to establish the punic genetic roots of Severus he is free to do so. Lobus (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Septimius_Severus&oldid=1261182064"