Talk:Rosalia (festival)

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rosalia (festival) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Rosalia (festival) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 June 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in the Roman Empire, the Rosalia was a floral commemoration of the dead observed by pagans, Jews, and Christians?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rosalia (festival).

Wikipedia

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Roman Empire#Spectacles and recreation|at the amphitheater]]
[[Gaza City#Ancient period|Gaza]] The anchor (#Ancient period) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Congrats and comment[edit]

Congratulations on an interesting DYK!

However, I want to comment less positively on the use of illustrations. There are quite a number of images here drawn from the 17th to 19th centuries. In every case where the modern picture has been used to illustrate the ancient context, it is of far less value than the Ancient depictions of the same event, and, despite being appropriately captioned, may confuse rather than inform the reader, because in every case the artistic notion is bound to be an inaccurate one.

My suggestion is that a section is devoted to representations of Rosalia in art and that the group of pictures is placed there. (I am not referring to those that deal with the continuing Marian tradition.) As an art historian, I see one of the aspects of any work of art as being a primary source of history, for the period to which it dates. Hence an imaginative, illustrative and romanticised 19th century painting is a primary source to the 19th century, and shouldn't be used as a primary source to an ancient culture, regardless of what it depicts, and regardless of how beautiful it is. The only reason for drawing such a source as illustrative material for an encyclopedic article would be that there is no other depiction. In this case, there are a number of relevant pics.

Amandajm (talk) 06:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't disagree more. FIrst of all, that would most assuredly be OR: I'm aware of no scholarly treatment of the "Rosalia in art" that would generate text for such a section. Second, please read the classical tradition: reception is an important part of classical studies, and an area that is enjoying renewed attention from classicists. (In fact, books from scholarly presses often use a cover image from later paintings. T.P. Wiseman begins his crossover book on Roman mythology by looking at the reception of Roman myths and legends by painters from the Renaissance through Romanticism.) Third, each image is clearly labeled with its date, so readers know this is a later representation. Some even have footnotes to works explaining that the painting is a treatment of classical themes. Fourth, if you've read the article, you've seen that themes of continuation, syncretism, and adaptation are inherent in the treatment of this festival. Moreover, the interest in illustrating classical themes around the turn of the 19th-20th century reflects and was inspired by archaeological discoveries of the 19th century and by the vivid interest in myths and their interpretation generated by the work of J.G. Frazer, Jane Ellen Harrison, and others. The approach you advocate runs completely counter to the spirit of classical studies. Cutting the study of antiquity off from its later reception renders it into a merely academic or antiquarian pursuit, rather than a living tradition. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]