Talk:Gaius Julius Hyginus

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia

	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 science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

(title of the work)

Who calls it Poeticon astronomicon? It's usually cited as de Astronomia, which the 1992 Teubner calls it.
Both works are widely held to be abridgements of the same work actually by Hyginus; but who claims they are "by the same hand" - and, more importantly, on what evidence? MSS from the late Roman period are very rare; and the two texts do differ non-trivially in dealing with common matter. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarissimi uiri Hyginii Poeticon astronomicon opus utilissimum. The title under which a text attributed to "most famous" Hyginus appeared in its editio princeps, Erhard Ratdolt from Augsburg, Venice, 1482. The Wikipedia article Poeticon astronomicon could use improving. --Wetman 01:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly English or modern usage; and unlikely to reflect MS usage in 1482. I see no reason not to amend. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that "from the same hand" is from the 1911 Britannica. If I find it in a modern editor, I will put it back, but for now, see my edit summary. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1911

This article does contain text from the 1911 Britannica; the diff from the copy makes that clear. (It is, of course, no longer entirely from the Britannica; but the "it is suggested" locution, now tagged, survives verbatim, and the entire line of argument is from 1911.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs an intro

The article is good, but it needs an intro. Said: Rursus (☻) 16:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ehmm, I disagree with myself a little, the text adulescentem imperitum, semidoctum, stultum etc. seems to be unencyclopedic drivel from Encyclopedia Britannica of 1911. Wikipedia don't do such illformulated subjective statements, we're making a real encyclopedia. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 16:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong again!! Only the three leading and neutral-in-tone paragraphs are from Encyclopedia Britannica. They're OK. That adulescentem imperitum, semidoctum, stultum is from somewhere else. I still think those statements don't belong to here, in their current form. I'm going to find the source and fix it! ... said: Rursus (bork²) 17:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the foul-mouthed statements from H. I. Rose and A. L. Keith (neither of them having an article on Wikipedia) to an independent para. If anyone feel like "then-do-it-better-yourself-Rose-and-Keith!", that new para is very removable, and few will complaint. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 17:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

H. J. Rose is not wholly obscure.--Wetman (talk) 23:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then keep it. Besides, now it looks nice indeed! (The edits after mine!) Thanks a lot! ... said: Rursus (bork²) 09:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Authorship

"Under the name of Hyginus there are extant what are probably two sets of school notes abbreviating his treatises on mythology"

Can someone make this more clear? He didn't write these two works, correct? You could say that they are an epitome of his work by some other unknown author. But as it stands, the phrasing is very unclear. 216.54.22.188 (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact in the Italian language Wikipedia reports two different entry: "Igino (astronomo)" (I century AD), to whom are attributed the De Astronomia and the Fabulae and "Caio Giulio Igino" (64 BC – AD 17), to whom are attributed some works nowadays almost entirely lost, while and the English version reports only the entry "Gaius Iulius Hyginus". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soldan~itwiki (talk • contribs) 10:59, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gaius Julius Hyginus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]