Talk:Antioch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| High | This article is on a subject of High-importance within classical antiquity. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Turkey, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Turkey-related topics. Please visit the the participants page if you would like to get involved. Happy editing! |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. |
 |
edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Antioch: |
|---|---|
|
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category |
|
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece. | ||||||
| If you would like to participate, you can improve Antioch, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. | |||||||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments) | ||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as a Mid priority article | ||||||
|
|||||||
 |
Antioch is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
 |
Crusades task force | ||
|
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:
|
|||
 |
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Turkey may be able to help! |
| The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Contents |
[edit] old talk (may be unsigned, unsorted, un-titled)
The article says Antioch remains the seat of one of the Eastern Orthodox patriarchs. But I have read that the Patriarch of Antioch is now located in Damascus, Syria (see [1] (about an Antiochian Orthodox bishop charged with groping a woman in a casino)). And if he's in Syria, why does he continue to be called the "Patriarch of Antioch"? Michael Hardy 23:50, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Response: As I noted in the article itself, the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch indeed resides in Damascus, but retains the title "Patriarch of Antioch." Patriarchal headquarters were moved to Damascus presumably because the Syrians were more hospitable than the Turks.
-
- The name Antioch still has prestige in terms of Christian history, but the city has had a very checkered history, and Antioch hasn't been any kind of real Christian population center for a very long time (and the Greek Patriarchate was headquartered in Damascus even under the late Ottoman Empire, according to http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01567a.htm ). AnonMoos 03:53, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
Could the writer of this article, or someone else knowledgeable, provide me with a source on the population of the city being around 500.000 in the Roman era, if possible with a distinction between the number of free people and of slaves? I do not especially doubt the statement, since the figures I have gathered from various sources range wildly from ca. 100.000 to ca. 450.000, but whether or not slaves are included in the number usually accounts for such fluctuations with regard to population figures of ancient and classical cities. --Santetjan 9 July 2005 18:46 (UTC)
- I don't have such a source (unless you count a brief mention in the old Catholic Encyclopedia http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01570a.htm , or its being drawn with a double circle on several maps in Colin McEvedy's "Penguin Atlas of Ancient History"), but Antioch was clearly one of the two most important cities of the Roman East (three after the foundation of Constantinople), down to the Arab conquest. AnonMoos 03:53, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Self contradictory
I am unsure of which part of the article is incorrect, but it does contradict itself, placing Paul's speech at both this Antioch (Antioch-on-the-Orontes) and a different place called Antioch (Pisidian Antioch).
Statement 1:
- Antioch occupies an important place in the history of Christianity. It was here that Paul preached his first Christian sermon in a synagogue, and here that followers of Jesus were first called Christians (Acts 11:26).
Statement 2:
- Many other cities within the Seleucid empire were also named Antioch, most of them founded by Seleucus I Nicator. For instance Pisidian Antioch in Central-West Turkey is where Saint Paul gave his first sermon to the Gentiles.
Or perhaps Paul's "first Christian sermon" is not the same as Paul's "first sermon to the Gentiles"? It would help if this matter could be clarified. --Tabor 18:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- humm, why would gentiles be in a synagogue? ~~
-
I would assume that this is definitely contradictory. The Bible itself provides no answers - it just refers to "Antioch." john k 19:38, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Response: See Acts 13:13ff.
[edit] other uses template
Why, oh why, must we clutter up the top of the article with rubbish? The other uses template might not be the correct solution for every article. I have no probelm with that. The text as-is, however, uses the word "Antioch" three times. Woe is me! Tedernst | talk 05:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, when I first changed it to Otheruses, Antioch was actually mispelled once! And it's not just repetition, almost every word is duplicated in the very next sentence (the lede). Bad form. Excrable editting.
- William Allen Simpson 13:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I see that several others have applied the same analysis, and it currently is {{Otherplaces}}.
- William Allen Simpson 13:20, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] cleanup
TodorBozhinov has applied the cleanup tag. I suggest that the text on modern Antakya be moved into its own article. Many historical cities have their own pages.--William Allen Simpson 13:20, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- That's a good idea. In addition we should seriously review the EB1911 text that this article was sadly based on. It takes 10 seconds to cut and paste blocks of EB1911 text, and years to "cleanup". --Stbalbach 18:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- OK, initial Antakya stub split done. --William Allen Simpson 00:40, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
I made some changes in the early history, added info on the archaeological excavations and did some other miscellaneous moving around and cleanup - I hope this is a good start. The middle of the article still needs some major pruning and cleanup, as Stbalbach mentioned above. HVH 13:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Antioch/Antakya
Mr. Simpson, I don't want us to make a mess of the version history so I thought maybe we should discuss on here about when this article should make it's initial reference to Antakya. I really think splitting it into a separate article was an excellent idea on your part. You're probably very familiar with the subject but I just looked at both the articles, and to somebody unfamiliar with this bit of history, there's a fair amount of reading to be done before they make the connection between Antioch and Antakya. It seems to me that the relation is fairly important if the subjects of the articles were similar enough that they used to be one! Maybe you could suggest some wording for how to weave the Antakya reference into the introduction (I also put one to Antioch in the Antakya article, since its likewise important). My ideas go something along the lines of: "..., (a(n) ancient/classical (Hellenic/Greek/Syrian?) city located on the same site as) present/modern day (Turkish?) Antakya,..." Forgive the computer scientesque notation. That leaves quite a few combinations. Have you got any other ideas? Adam Mathias 02:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- This is an article about an ancient city that is near to a modern one. They aren't actually on the same site (although the modern one is overtaking the ancient one).
- Had you more experience working on articles of this region, you'd know that sticking a modern word in the translation at the top is frowned upon. Sometimes, there are a series of cities on/near the same site. Each city (with enough historical information) gets its own page. The "See also" at the end references the others. That's what "See also" means.
- Also, you'd know that there is some sensitivity about where in a modern article to begin references to ancient names. After many revert wars, the general consensus is that ancient names in a modern article are not mentioned except in a section labeled "History", not at the top.
- This is especially sensitive here, as the Greek "Antioch on the Orontes" and Medieval Ecclesiatical Latin "Syrian Antioch" is located in an area disputed between modern Syria and modern Turkey. The Turks are entirely rational in finding the church latin name offensive.
- --William Allen Simpson 12:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- I just read on anohter page in here that the dispute between Syria and Turkey was resolved in 2005. I made some edits just b/c I could not figure out what was going on just by reading the intro paragraphs, I hope I did not step on any toes by moving a link to the modern day city into the 1st para and saying that its an historic city, now extinct, that also had that latin name unsigned 69.107.125.159
- That's better, but then the See also has to be removed per WP:Section. Done.
- --William Allen Simpson 17:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Antakya is not a city located in the same spot as antioch, it is Antioch, after evolving for nearly two millenia. London may be located at the same spot as Londinium, since Londinium was effectivelly abandoned during the saxon invasions; or Mexico city to Tenochtitlan since this latter city was totally destroyed, but antioch never ceased to be an important city, and since it never died, it lives still today as Antakya. Nobody will say that modern London is a city located on the same site as medieval London, I suppose. 84.91.76.45 (talk) 13:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, both London and Antioch have gone through periods of strong decline, when they weren't really important cities... AnonMoos (talk) 11:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Why revert?
Why the article was reverted to a clearly inferior form?--RafaelG 16:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Map Request
In the Requested Maps section of the community portal, I found a request for a map noting the position of Antioch within turkey. I've made one, but before I post it I would like to make sure that it is the correct Antioch, and that the map is the correct color/style/etc. If any contributor to this article could point me in the right direction, it would be appreciated. --CommKing 21:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Judging by the date of the last post to this talk page, I'm attaching the map now. I will make edits if they are requested. --CommKing 21:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
It's accurate but I had to get out my atlas because I've never seen Turkey portrayed like that. It would be helpful if the water surrounding Turkey was colored blue and the surrounding land black (it's all black currently and hard to see that Antioch is on the sea). -- Stbalbach 00:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I'm working on it now. --CommKing 20:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Here's a new copy. I cannot gaurantee perfect accuracy on the western Caspian Sea border. Tell me what you think. --CommKing 21:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah a lot easier on the eyes, thanks! -- Stbalbach 21:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm taking off the Requested Map template. --CommKing 16:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism
I'm having difficulty understanding why this article is such a vandalism magnet... AnonMoos 02:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Arab Period
Something is missing from the last sentence of the Arab Period section. "Muslims believe it will be found...." I can't tell what it refers to. Maybe a sentence is missing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.115.217 (talk) 04:31, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
I have deleted the following sentence at the end of the Arab Period section: "Muslims believe that it will be found by Mahdi near the end of times in the city of Antakya or Antioch." As I mentioned above on August 29, 2007, something seems to be missing from this sentence; i.e., the object that the word "it" refers to, which will be found in Antioch by (the) Mahdi at the end of times. Four months have passed, and no one has supplied the missing element. Personally, I'm very curious to know what it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.123.49 (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Local inhabitants
During the hellenistic/roman period were the original inhabitants Greeks or from the Luwians, Lycians...I'm looking into roman history and the antiochene people(then)...any info.?Domsta333 (talk) 10:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Antioch was the western capital of the Seleucid empire, and soon became a major trade hub and grew to have a population approaching or exceeding 100,000 (one of only 2 or 3 cities in the whole Europe and middle east region to do so in the Hellensitic period). So the answer is that it was a cosmopolitan city, attracting individuals from far and wide... AnonMoos (talk) 12:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Striking relations with Lithuania and Balts
Zeus Bottiaeus in Lithuanian language 'Dzevs Botiaus' means God of our ancestors...Aleksandras in Lithuanian language 'A(t)lek(e)s Antras' means born second and Macedon 'Manke Duona' means knead bread...Hun in Lith. 'Gunas/ganytojas' means pastor/shep-herd and Atila 'Eitila' means going/runing the office —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.173.120 (talk) 05:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, we know Lithuanian is an Indo-European language, and in some respects a "conservative" Indo-European language (considering that its first substantial attestation is in the medieval period). But that doesn't mean that there's any special relationship between Greece and Macedonia, and none of the etymologies you proposed have any direct relationship to Antioch... AnonMoos (talk) 07:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
