Talk:Pompeii/Archive 1

Pliny Text

Just a note to myself and anybody else wishing to contributed to the article: The Pliny text is important to have in this article, but since the same text is now in the Pliny article, I think it this text should be integrated into the main body of the Pompeii article. Since this is the only reliable historical account of the destruction I think this text should go there. Much of the text should be removed and there should be more of a focus on eruption itself and not on the two Plinys. --maveric149

Done --maveric149, Friday, April 19, 2002

DID YOU KNOW!!! The earliest ever brewery coaster was founded in Pompeii

I regret I wasn't able to explain immediately what I had done, moving Pliny's text to Pliny the Younger, but I had serious connection problems and had to surrender after a number of timeouts, so I did not even complete the page on Pliny and the whole resulted perhaps in a sort of blitz. Fundamentally it is what effectively maveric did. I regret I de facto forced others to do what I intended and had to. Thank you maveric! :-) --Gianfranco, Saturday, April 20, 2002

No reason to apologise. The text as it was needed to be moved to the Pliny article and also simplified for the Pompeii article. We all have been having problems with the speed of the site lately. BTW, you have done a great job with this article --- I did improve some of the grammar for you, but the info is great. --maveric149

Pompey

There should be some reference to Pompey. -- Error 02:41, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Earthquake Date

my book of archeology says, the earthquake was 62, this article says 63. which one is right? -- 141.53.194.251 14:27, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

• My book also said it was in 62 so I updated it. If someone finds out that both our text-books were wrong here I also editted 62 and 63. --John Lynch 08:33, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Walk on ruins

I heard that Pompeii is unusual in that you can freely walk on the ruins and touch the remains. Is that true? Can people touch the frescoes? Something should be said about the visit rules and touristic importance of Pompeii for the Naples(?) area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.3.239 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 3 August 2004 (UTC)

No you can't touch the frescoes :( However you can walk about and walk through the city. But within reason touching things was a big no no. You couldn't walk on the frescoes that were on the ground, etc.--John Lynch 11:46, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Frescoes were strictly done on ceilings and walls, never(!) on the ground.--Luxgratia (talk) 15:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Some of the buildings are open and you can touch Frescoes. Well that is, they are touchable. I've touched them. Whether you're allowed to or not, I'm not sure! ForkieTMS (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Of course it is not permitted to touch them. If it was they would soon wear off completely. Most of the finest have been either moved to the museum in Naples or been encased in glass, but as Pompeii is such a large site some have been left unprotected, with the result that they are withering fast, both as a result of the weather and from people touching them. So please, next time resist your urge to touch them. --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Where to Include Stuff Question

Where would people suggest we include information in the article on life of Pompeii? Such as the fact that baths existed outside of the city walls for people who worked outside the walls to wash themselves in? Or the fact that the Pompeiians weren't expecting a death at all as there is evidence they were rebuilding places, such as the forum better then before and had barred carts from entering the forum because of how good the new floor was? --John Lynch 14:20, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm trying to re-organise it around a more chronological framework, which should make this easier, and also to merge out stuff on the eruption itself and Pliny's account (both of which have wider ramifications than just for Pompeii) to Mount Coronet Neddyseagoon 16:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)neddyseagoon

I think this sounds like a good idea and these details would provide a more complete picture. AlexandreaAdams (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)AlexandreaAdams

Breezy style, but accurate information

Our anonymous friend 205.188.116.131 may not have the formal style quite mastered yet, but his information was perfectly accurate and appropriate. The wells did dry up before the eruption (I added further material along those lines, although my date of "65 AD" may be a year or two off, it's from memory); and the Vulcanalia (q.v.) were a real festival in honor of the Roman god of fire, and did indeed take place every year on August 23. (On the other hand the bit about August being in winter is egregious nonsense, and I removed it. The calendar was totally reformed by then, even including the slight error in the reform itself, which was corrected by Augustus: August 23 was almost the same August 23 we know now. Gradually, the Julian calendar went out of sync with the seasons again, but very slowly, and in the 1st century, it was not off by 1 day yet.) — Bill 16:29, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Pick a day

The article (and discussion on this page) say the eruption was August 23rd. The page on Vesuvius, the Today In History pages and Robert Harris's book say the eruption was on the 24th. Anyone know for certain? Zac (--202.154.157.204 12:32, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC))

I would also have to ask, by which calendar system. -- Beland 03:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The page on Vesuvius now argues for a date of October HonkyTonkHarlot (talk) 05:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The real date has never been positively pinned down. There is some evidence for the October date, but it is largly circumstantial. For example, foodstuffs were found in a carbonised state in Herculaneum that would not have been available in August. Also, heating equipment was in use in Herculaneum that would have been unnecessary in August. However, these in themselves are not conclusive. It could have been unseasonably cold in August 79 (though this would not explain why foodstuffs ripened two months earlier than normal). 86.157.172.38 (talk) 16:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Minor Edit

The inhabitants of Pompeii, as those of the area tozay, had long been used to minor tremors and wisps of gas from Mt. Vesuvius, and in 62 there had been a series of earthquakes serious enough to cause structural damage to houses in town; and in early August of 79, all the town's wells dried up; but the warnings were not sharp enough, and the Roman world was stunned when on August 24 a catastrophic volcanic eruption of the volcano buried the city and obscured the sun on a mild afternoon.

This sentence seemed a bit long and unnecessarily complex, edited into too. Jayhawk88 21:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Reburying Erotic Frescos

"Some have theorized, without proof, that Fontana initially found some of the famous erotic frescoes and, due to the strict modesty prevalent during his time, reburied them in an attempt at archaeological censorship." ... I'm no uncited theorist, but given the unbridled Catholicism rampant in 1599, if Fontana didn't destroy the frescos outright it seems he may have been trying to protect them. Would it be too much to add "or preservation"? Pjrich 05:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes i agree with Pjrich.Jee 04:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC) Me too. Nanotech64 10:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanotech64 (talk • contribs)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Pompeii/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

==Maybe a Good Article== I feel that this is has the Good Article feel to it. The article is long, but not too long. It properly cites its sources, and covers many parts of history. The part I especially like is the little-known facts, but it cites the sources. Geosultan4 18:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC) == Mt. Vesuvius to erupt again? == I was surprised to see that no information was included in this article about the fact that increased activity is being detected around Mt. Vesuvius and that it is widely believed that the volcano may have another sizable eruption sometime in the near future. Of course, this is a perplexing dilemma for the archaeologists and other researchers working at the site. Kristijrn —Preceding undated comment added 06:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC).

Last edited at 06:48, 13 November 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 21:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)