Jump to content

Talk:Pompeii/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

What does it mean by "lost?"

If we've preserved the writings of Kirby, and he mentions Pompeii and Herculaneum, presumably people who read him must have known that some city by the name of Pompeii existed and was overwhelmed by Vesuvius. Does the term "lost" simply mean that their locations were forgotten, or does Pliny not actually mention the two cities by name in his writings and only mention the eruption?--Rob117 00:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The locations were lost, which isn't very strange as the towns were covered under five to fifteen metres of rock and the area suffered many later upheavals. Except for the very first days after the disaster at Pompeii, there was no option to even think of going "treasure-hunting" in the period up to the actual digs in the mid-18th century. Plus, Pliny's letters were not that widely read in the middle ages and his epistle doesn't indicate Pompeii at all. Nor does any ancient author, the only mentions of Pompeii we have are in inscriptions found later than 1750, excepting a single one uncovered by Fontana which mentioned an officiual at Pompeii - but the fact that it indicated a city name that was unknown at the time was ignored. Herculaneum is mentioned in a few Roman books though.Strausszek (talk) 10:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Recordings?

I've seen this link passed around now: that the grooves on pottery found in Pompeii are actually recordings. I say it is a spurious claim and would like to see it refutted. I don't think the Romans had pzieoelectric devices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.59.96.25 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Truth is that I remember playing recordings with no electric or electronic device whatsoever. Pure mechanics, and using a hand crank with a clockwork style governer and a steel needle with a diaphram and long parabolic horn, they were quite loud! we called them 78's and i still have some, and still have the needles in a cool little tin with the image of the dog listening to the music. prior to the disc it was a tube, a cylinder, and I believe that the ancients had more than we know, and that it would be easy to play those grooves if we wanted to. It was a two way mechanical process. I later became a sound engineer for many years. moza 12:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I heard about this kind of accidental "paleo-recordings" a few years ago, and the idea is quite intriguing of course. The supposed mechanism sounds sensible to me, though the recording would be very unfocused because the potter would have nothing that gathered in the sound, amped it (analogous to a mike or early recordings which were made by speaking into a wide funnel narrowing and leading to the membrane. The Romans or Greeks wouldn't have any means of actual playback either. But on principle it seems logical you'd be able to sift out a very rough recording and process it with modern equiipment, if you can calibrate the correct spped (were ancient potters actually able to get, like, one turn a second or faster? with purely acoustic recording you need a higher rpm rate than with the later 33 rpm LP). But then, on the earliest known and published sound recordings - a few seconds of a man singing in French about 1860, relocated just a year or two ago - it's not very easy to catch the sound either behind the flow of crackle. Strausszek (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hotel Murecine

I have been to Pompeii many, many times and know its geography well. I have never heard of The Grand Hotel Murecine. Where is it, please?--Anthony.bradbury 14:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Ame here, never heard about this. It's not to find at the Eschbach. Kenwilliams 13:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No I have never heard of it either and I live close by. To be totally honest I don't think it exists. It has probably been made up. JBeeldman 17:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It is cited in an article published in a major Italian newspaper, La Repubblica. Link: http://www.repubblica.it/online/cultura_scienze/corpi/pompei/pompei.html GhePeU 11:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Pompei vs Pompeii

Does anyone know why English speakers spell it Pompeii and Italians spell it Pompei (the ruins as well as the modern town)? --87.18.216.215 00:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)... your point is

Ei versus eii

The spelling Pompeii derives from a time when Germanic archaeologists were prominent in archaeological writing. Because the pronunciation of the dipthong 'ei' is pronounced in German (and also phonetically) like the english word 'eye' making the possible pronunciation 'Pomp-eye' the extra 'i' was added to avoid this mispronunciation. 203.27.90.186 03:25, 28 September 2006 (UT)

It should really be spelled Pompei. Wikipedia should set the record straight and remove the ridiculous spelling of Pompeii.

The above about Germanic archaeologists is a complete mare’s nest. The “ridiculous spelling” of Pompeii happens to be the Latin form of the name, a second declension plural. The Castiglioni-Mariotti Latin dictionary gives Pompeii, orum. There’s a certain logic, after all, in using the Latin name for the ancient city and Pompei for the Italian town. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Campolongo (talk • contribs) 09:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC) I should add that we still need someone to inform us where the name came from - the Pompeii family? If I find it I will insert the info, but we really need an expert to tell us.

I just read (on German and Italian wikipedia, no citation) that the name is actually Oscan and was latinized later by the Romans. The Pompeian family (gens Pompeia) hails from Pompeii, hence the name. -- megA (talk) 20:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

It sounds as if the above information is relevant and should be added to the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.36.179.31 (talk) 16:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC) I put it in the introduction —Preceding unsigned comment added by Campolongo (talk • contribs) 10:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Modern Figures in Pompeii

I'm thinking of adding a new section detailing the contributions of various figures in contributing to our knowledge of Pompeii, for instance, detailing the work of Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, John DeFelice, Estelle Lazer, Sara Bisel, Allison Cooley, Penelope Allison, Joseph Deiss etc. Would it be worthwile adding it? Which other historians and archaeologists should I do? Would it perhaps be better to outline modern perspectives of Pompeii as a whole to examine the changing interpretations of the site? --Lord Pheasant 04:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Pompeii

Ņŝ Ûso for the matter of the volcano, the entire sister city of Herculaneum, will forever be a mystery. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.252.219.187 (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

I am mystified by the above comment; anyone else? Strausszek (talk) 04:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Cut Trivia

Cut the following:

In an episode of Highlander: The Series, the character Joe Dawson explains that the eruption may have been caused by two immortals fighting on holy ground (considered taboo).

This seems a very trivial bit of info, not to mention that it's a line of dialogue. It would be one thing if the entire episode took place in Pompeii, but not a single line. It would be like including a note about the film Mystery Men because the Ben Stiller character says "I'm going to go Pompeii on your ass!" RoyBatty42 19:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello.Cyark is a nonprofit hi-definition heritage network employing 3D laser scanning at UNESCO sites worldwide for educational purposes, and has partnerships with prominent University and national institutions worldwide including UC Berkeley in California, University of Ferrara in Italy, ITABC, American Museum of Natural History, etc. (please see here for a complete list). We would like to have a link to our extensive online database on the Pompeii Wikipedia page, if possible. Would a senior editor consider placing this up? Thanks.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyark (talk • contribs) 22:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the link got deleted while someone was reverting vandalism. Since it appears to meet the standards of WP:EL, I will re-add the link. --Seattle Skier (See talk tierS) 21:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The popular culture section for this page is really getting way overblown, with numerous obscure and non-notable references. Does anyone else agree that the article would be improved if all, or nearly all, of the text in that section was obliterated? (Using pyroclastic flows to do it might be fitting.) Mlouns 01:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think you're probably right. There isn't much actual content in there is there. Ditch it, I say. Eve 11:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
If I hear no further objections, I plan to take out pretty much the whole section in the next day or so. Mlouns 18:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Vesubius eruption?

I've heard some people saying that the volcanoe was not the Vesubious, that this is one of the most extended wrong information. I've been told by some friends of mine (that do not know among themselves) that there was (there is?) a nearby volcanoe and it was that other one (I've been told the name, but right now I don not recall it), I have even been told that the Vesubious was not active by that time.
Is there any truth in this? Is it just another urban legend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.191.60.115 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Transportation

Under the Heading "Pompeii Today", the article states:

"The ruins are only accessible to tourists through the train line to the modern town, or else a private train line, the Circumvesuviana, that runs directly to the ancient site."

This is untrue. One can also catch a SITA bus from the SITA bus station in the port area in Naples. The bus stops on the main road through modern Pompei around the corner from the Information Centre. The entrance of the ruins is a 200 metre walk up hill from the Information Centre.

Take care with this route. There is no indication from the road of the ancient ruins close by. Note that the bus stop is the first one after leaving the freeway.

The bus stop to Naples is on the opposite side of the road.

The above route to Pompeii taken on June 20, 2007.

BinthareBinthare 10:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Replacing inaccurate CG image with more accurate version

File:Pompeii the last day 1.jpg
Current image
This is a very rough outline, NOT what the final image will look like.

I should explain that the image was obviously created with dramatic license for TV viewers. Artistically it's a great image but reading the caption of its depiction, I'm obviously not the only one bugged by some pretty obvious inaccuracies. For me the most irritating is how close Vesuvius seems to be in relation to Pompeii as well as its overall appearance. While I've never been there, on Google Maps it looks to be quite further away making a depiction of it looming over the town inaccurate. I've also seen pictures of art from Pompeii showing the mountain as being taller(more pointed) and green. However I agree with all the points made in our caption, so the city itself should look like it's in the process of slowly repairing damage from previous earthquakes.

To be clear, with a lot of work, I think I can create an image which looks just as good but takes into account historical knowledge ignored by the screenshot meeting this criteria:

  • 1 Quality equal to or exceeding Image:Pompeii the last day 1.jpg
  • 2 Larger depiction of Pompeii including damage both being repaired and in some cases waiting for repair
  • 3 Placement of Vesuvius in a more accurate location, with farms/villas between it and Pompeii.
  • 4 Attention to areas I may have missed from other editors.

Anynobody 23:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


Here's an accurate photo. Vesuvio from Pompei
But, remember that the old caldera was much bigger, and the whole top blew off, so the original image was not far off.
187.132.70.251 (talk) 05:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Mountains rising over a plain have a knack for appearing closer and more dominating than they actually are. It's hard to judge distances if you're looking towards a high mountain five to fifteen miles away across a flat or slightly rising plain with no big villages or towns to gauge distances. Strausszek (talk) 06:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Pliny the Elder/Younger

I have reverted the latest edit relating to comments about the veracity of Pliny's account of Vesuvius's eruption. Who are the historians who question his account? We are not told at all. On the contrary, volcanologists have used his account and verified details which non-scientific historians have apparently queried. Please refer to the Pliny articles for confirmation. Peterlewis (talk) 10:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Peter. Brian Brennan (Macquarie University) is one such historian, as is his colleague Estelle Lazer. The various troubles with Pliny's letter as a source mostly arise when it is taken as gospel. I agree that non-scientific historians are a problem, but so are non-historical scientists!! So for instance, when Pliny writes that he saw clouds "between 2 and 3 in the afternoon," who is to say that time marks the beginning of the eruption? He may not have noticed those clouds until they were well-developed. And yet the official "time" of the eruption is still based upon pseudo-facts from his letters. Brennan has said outright that any attempt to assign times to stages of the eruption is ridiculous - so the much-lauded "Pompeii: The Last Days" isn't as accurate as it purports to be. Other problems of reliability stem from the fact that the letter was written decades after the event it describes. In addition Pliny was miles away from Pompeii, resulting in further inaccuracies in timing stages of the eruption from his account. None of these things mean the letter should be discounted, but they do mean it should not be relied upon so heavily as it is. If anyone reading this can get their hands on a copy of "Pompeii and Herculaneum: interpreting the evidence" by Brian Brennan and Estelle Lazer, that'd be an ideal source to cite with regards to controversy surrounding the reliability of Pliny. It could help with writing a passage on daily life in Pompeii, too. Beruthiel (talk) 23:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Agree, and one should be clear that Pliny doesn't even mention Pompeii or Herculaneum, nor does he ever describe the impact on them - he's taking it for granted of course, everyone knew the area had been destroyed and buried. And concerning timings, in any case, his sense of time spans must have grown a bit hazy after the sky had gone pitch dark and his uncle had left, plus he was retelling it 25 years later.
Two ancient Roman writers - Valerius Flaccus and Cassius Dio - mention a thundering sound at the outset of the eruption; Michael Grant in his book, Cities of Vesuvius, surmises that it was the sound of the mountain cracking open and finding a new outlet, and that seems very likely. The same kind of bellowing was heard at some eruptions of Vesuvius in modern times. Pliny doesn't mention it, most likely he didn't hear it. Strausszek (talk) 05:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

ES Posthumus

Aloha. As an anon IP, I can't add the "Category:E.S. Posthumus songs" tag to it. Can someone else do it? Cheers! 62.72.110.11 (talk) 08:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

pink floyd did a documentary on a live session of the band in pompeii

98.218.1.227 (talk) 04:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pompeii/Archive_2&oldid=1137092157"