Talk:Cassius Chaerea

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: Biography / Roman & Byzantine / Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What do you mean "citation needed"?[edit]

The article talks about a "possible wound to his genitalia" and then says there is a "citation needed" to this claim. However, there can't be a need to show a citation for any claim of anything being a mere possibility. Yes, he was POSSIBLY wounded in his genitalia, just like he was POSSIBLY not, and there is no need to prove that... just like the reader of the article is from the perspective of my limited knowledge about him / her possibly reading this in Europe (and possibly not) and there is no reason for me to back up my statement because either way (whether the reader is or isn't in Europe) I am right... I can't go wrong.

The only reason to include that statement of a possible wound to his genitalia then is to give the reader an idea or example of one of the things that could have caused the problem he had of having a feminine voice. Therefore, it is both adequate to have that statement and needless of a citation to back it up. I think we should thus remove the "citation needed" thing and effectively have. You will possibly agree with me.

Firstly, I am unable to find reference to a wound to the genitalia in Suetonius or Tacitus. Since Cassius Chaerea has been featured in fiction, it could be that this is the invention of some author. Secondly, I don't think that your argument about the use of the word "possibly" making a citation unnecessary will stand up to much scrutiny. I could add the phrase "possibly a martian" to every biography on wikipedia, without any sort of citation if I used your logic. To put it another way, there is nothing to distinguish the claim that he had a high voice (itself unsupported by the citations provided) because of a genital wound, from any other random claim about him. "Cassius Chaerea possibly had twelve toes" is just as valid a claim as his supposed genital wounds, but to include such a claim in the article would be unjustified because we lack any evidence of it (or more importantly for wikipedia, any citation from a reliable, scholarly source for it). Revcasy (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have also just checked Josephus (by far, the most detailed account of the assassination) and there no reference is made to wounds or to a high voice. Revcasy (talk) 15:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seneca does mention a high voice, but makes no mention of a wound. I would like to add that the use of all of these primary sources is problematic from the viewpoint of WP, even if they supported the claim to a wound, which they do not. Revcasy (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

The opening paragraphs of this article seem somewhat dubious. Unless the author would be so kind as to provide adequate citations for the more detailed and seemingly personal information listed I will go ahead and remove it. Alot of related information on this subject on wikipedia appears to have been lifted directly from films. Anyone object to this? Yaxchilan (talk) 22:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is all from Suetonius. And yes, it sounds dubious, but not unusual for ancient sources. Stan (talk) 02:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graves/Teutoberger[edit]

No verfication is given for asserting that Graves made up Chaerea's service @ Teutoberger. He has a bad reputation among academic classicists, but that doesn't substantiate the assertion. Tapered (talk) 08:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A little research revealed that Tacitus did record Chaerea's distinguished service under Germanicus in Germany. Hence my article change today. Tapered (talk) 09:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

one of the few assassins to be actually condemned[edit]

This phrase is ambiguous and unsourced, and the paragraph it appears in has a [citation needed] tag. What does the phrase mean? Does it mean that Cassius was one of the few conspirators in the plot to kill Caligula to be condemned, or does it mean that he was one of the few assassins of Roman Emperors to be condemned to death? 2001:630:3C1:90:F8DF:5EB0:3DBF:C37E (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]