Talk:Roman salute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (periods and conflicts): Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD)

Contents 1 Ancient Authenticity? 2 Discussion 3 Wikipedia lies 4 Palm upward or downward? 5 merge? 6 Blank pages 7 Edit war 8 removed content 9 Modern use in armies 10 little mistake 11 "Hollywoodized" gesture?

[edit] Ancient Authenticity?

The questions of the authenticity of the Roman salute's ancient origin are significant. If it is real, then why can't someone provide a single evidence? A painting from 1784 is not proof, and possibly not appropriate or NPOV without historical evidence. Rex Curry's website (rexcurry.net) may be biased and polemic, but it does contain much documented evidence. It is appropriate to link it here, though if a website defending the ancient origin of the salute could be found both should be linked. In the meantime, it can't be considered POV biased to link to it if no one has counterarguments. People could just refuse to make counterarguments, and then hide the arguments from the public with the excuse that there is nothing with which to balance it. That is not the spirit of Wikipedia. Carltonh 18:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

I recall seeing in print a photo of children in a U.S. classroom rendering the Roman salute to Old Glory. Is there one online we could use with this article? -- knoodelhed 05:49, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The sites this page is referring to are both highly polemic, in fact they are pages of the same site. Now that's fine, just that I have a sneaking suspicion the people who made this page were influenced by this site. Maybe some other data could be found? Renke

I've seen the inauguration of a couple of Mexican presidents on TV. They take an oath while holding an arm out in a fashion very similar to the Roman salute. Does anyone know if it's in fact from the same tradition?

[edit] Wikipedia lies

There are some regular writers on Wikipedia who knowingly perpetuate many lies, and delete anyone who tells the truth. They are lying liars and the lies they tell include the top media cover ups: They cover up many historic photos the Pledge of Allegiance showing the original straight-arm salute (http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html) and the fact that the Pledge's author was a National Socialist, and that the Pledge's straight arm salute was the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis) (http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html) As part of their cover-up they perpetuate the Roman Salute myth. (http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html) And they lie about the oath of the horatii as an absurd support for a Roman connection (http://rexcurry.net/pledgehoratii.html) They cover up for the swastika and its use as a sick socialist symbol (http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html) They cover up for the socialist trio of atrocities. (http://rexcurry.net/socialists.html) They cover up the fact that socialists helped start WWII with the National Socialist German Workers' Party & the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as allies. (http://rexcurry.net/socialistwar.html) They cover up for and are deniers of the socialist Wholecaust, of which the monstrous Holocaust was part (http://rexcurry.net/mediacoverup.html) They cover up for the National Socialist German Worker's Party and always try to use the hackneyed shorthand "Nazi" (http://rexcurry.net/swastikamedia.html) Liars on Wikipedia repeat the most common lies of the media (http://rexcurry.net/mediapledge.html) and (http://rexcurry.net/socialistmedia.html) And they cover up the newer U.S. Supreme Court case that exposes the socialist history of the Pledge (http://rexcurry.net/pledgewonschik.html)

As an example, most of the "Roman Salute" page on Wikipedia is pure poppycock, especially near the top "The Roman salute is a closed finger, flat-palm-down hand raised at an angle (usually 45 degrees) and was used by the Roman Republic. It was also the historical civilian salute of the United States, from 1787?-1934?, known since 1892 as the Bellamy salute. It was also the historical salute among armies of the Middle East and South America. When the Nazi party of Germany adopted the Roman salute from the Italian fascists." The foregoing is all incorrect and of course without any attribution nor support on the Wikipedia page because there is no support. It is not a Roman salute and never was.

Similar criticisms apply to the Wikipedia pages on Francis Bellamy, Edward Bellamy and the Pledge of Allegiance.

As far as I can tell, the only claims along the lines raised in the above lengthy comment have been made by one "Rex Curry", mostly on rexcurry.net, and are not widely accepted or even known among historians. Unless evidence to the contrary is submitted, I would say that these views ought to be treated similarly to those of physics cranks. --Delirium 19:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Palm upward or downward?

This article mentions the Bellamy salute, and states that; This gesture required that the right hand be "extended gracefully, palm upward, toward the flag." Bellamy salute however, states; right hand lifted, palm downward, to a line with the forehead and close to it.. I can't make out on the photograph what orientation the children are using. In any case, this is a contradiction. squell 13:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

It's not a contradiction, but it's not fully explained. If you read the full description in the Bellamy salute article you will see that they start with a military salute, with the palm downward, the arm bent, and the hand next to the forehead - as in normal military salutes. The arm is then extended straight out from the forehead and the palm is turned upward. The quotation refers to the latter part of Bellamy's description, which is the point at which the arm is extended. In practice this rather complicated manouver wasn't always done according to the book. Paul B 13:53, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Right. I also noted Pledge of allegiance contains yet another description of saluting the flag. The point is, of course, to be clear about the distinctions/similarities between this salute and the fascist one. squell 14:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] merge?

I think this article should be merged into Hitler salute and the whole thing moved to fascist salute. Jooler 14:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

There is a case for merging the Hitler salute and Roman salute articles, but I don't think there is any reason to move to "fascist salute", it was never an exclusively fascist gesture. Paul B 16:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

No, but it is predominantly known as a fascist gesture, particularly in modern times. The most recent example to hit the headlines is Paolo Di Canio an Italian, not a Nazi. [1] Jooler 17:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

There were many fascist groups that did not use this salute. We can have one unified article, but there's also no reason why we shouldn't also have separate detailed articles on the Italian fascist and Nazi versions, as is the case with many other articles in which sub-sections link to a longer main article on a subject that's related to the central one. But I think the central article should still be called "Roman salute",as this is the standard term for the gesture, one which predates fascist usage. BTW, the most recent example in the uk headlines concerns a driver who has been sacked [2] for using the gesture with Nazi meaning. Paul B 17:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

This salute is also used by some polish nationalistic groups such as [pl:Młodzież Wszechpolska] (see http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grafika:Mlodziez_wszechpolska.jpg) but they insist that this gesture has nothing to do with the fascist or hitler salute. Mieciu K 17:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blank pages

I recieved a message saying that I should not leave blank pages in articles after editing. I have to say I am confused by this, my edit did not leave a blank page, I simply deleted a paragraph that appeared to be written by Rex Curry that was wholly inappropriate and non-professional. He accused several users by name of covering up for Francis Bellamy's ties to Socialism and his wish to transform America into a totalitarian state. Ive viewed Rex Curry's website and after reading it I seriously must question his mental health if not his sanity.

Relax, it was a misunderstanding, probably because of low-resolution monitor. mikka (t) 22:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war

It looks like we've got an edit war going on on this article. It's been reverted 3 times so far today and will probably be reverted again later. I edited the article earlier to remove the 2nd paragraph in the introduction. This paragraph is wholely in-appropriate for an encyclopedic article. The author accuses several writers by name of cover-ups and lies and contains too many links to the rexcurry.net website, or link spamming. DarthJesus 22:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It's a recurrent problem. Every so often Rex turns up and attempts to insert references to his "discoveries". Anyone who deletes them is a "wikling" who is part of a vast conspiracy against the truth.Paul B 09:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] removed content

I removed from the article the following content that I created because I was unable to find any sources <quote> Since the strength of the Roman legions lay in their discipline, all Roman legionaries were taught to hold their weapons in their right hand. Since Roman society was highly militarized, some historians presume that the Roman salute originated from a greeting and a symbol meaning "I come in peace holding no weapons".<end quote> Mieciu K 21:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you were right to revert it. I almost did so myself, and most Roman images of the "salute" appear to represent "salutes" in the original sense of the word - that is, salutations, or as we might say, waving. Paul B 22:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Modern use in armies

I was reading the noted exceptions of usage and I found it odd that so few were listed... in Portugal the army uses it in the "Allegiange to the Flag" cerimony that marks the end of the recruit... is this "abnormal" enough to warrant a mention? I'm waiting for some feedback on this since I don't see a reason to mention it if it's a common thing, but if it is a common thing it should be mentioned Several photos exist, an example of what I'm talking about: http://img296.imageshack.us/my.php?image=20050617cfyz5.jpg "Juramento de Bandeira, Academia Militar"

Well that photo has no context, but by all means add relevant material. Paul B 22:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

True, here is the context of the photo http://www.academiamilitar.pt/noticias/detalhes.php?id=77 "Academia Militar; it's the Military Academy site. I'll have to inquire for the usage policy os the photo though... A 1993 video on YouTube show the cerimony (50 secs), perhaps interesting as an external reference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqHfNJ2DcjA "Juramento de Bandeira, Porto 1993"--Bellum sine bello 18:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It freaked me out when I saw Felipe Calderón use it (the Nazi variant) in his inauguration ceremony. Is this traditional in Mexico or is it a political statement?

[edit] little mistake

The exact translation of "morituri" is "mortal men" rather than "those who are about to die"; thus to distinguish the emperor from all other mortal men.

"we who are about to die salute you" is the established standard translation of the phrase. [3] [4] I don't think we should be confusing people here - perhaps such technicalities would be appropriate on a page devoted to well-known Latin phrases. Paul B 11:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to discuss this sentence because I thought it was an incorrect information since there is a significant difference between "mortal men" and "those who are about to die". Seeing I am a brand new user of Wikipedia I respect and heed the decision of other people more experienced than me.

[edit] "Hollywoodized" gesture?

I found it interesting there wasn't anything in this article about the little "chest-thump" bit that you so often see Roman legions in Hollywood films and TV shows (HBO's Rome being an excellent example). Is that little gesture before the actual arm-raise based in fact? --Micahbrwn 03:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)