Talk:Pantheon, Rome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the assessment scale. |
 |
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. |
| Top | This article is on a subject of Top-importance within classical antiquity. |
 |
WikiProject Echo has identified Pantheon, Rome as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Finnish, Spanish, Italian or French language Wikipedias. |
 |
This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination did not succeed. For older candidates, please check the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations. |
 |
This article is currently or was the subject of an 2007-05-31 educational assignment. Further details are available here. |
Can we come up with a better name for this article? Pantheon at Rome? Pantheon in Rome? Roman Pantheon? No, that last one would probably be about the gods. Any other ideas? RickK 05:42, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I've changed this to "Pantheon in Rome", which was the title given in Pantheon. I agree – "Pantheon, Rome" is a horrible name and makes it sound like an American town. —Wereon 14:16, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
What's wrong with this name? It's the Pantheon, it's in Rome. Adam 06:06, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I don't have a big problem with Pantheon, Rome, but I'd vaguely favor The Pantheon. It is, after --Rnbc 01:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)all, fairly commonly known as the Pantheon, not just one of them. The general disambig. page could still be at Pantheon (there's several other instances where Blah is a disambig. page and The Blah is a particular page). --Delirium 06:09, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)
I'd go for The Pantheon RickK 06:11, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
The Pantheon in Paris is also called The Pantheon. It will look a little presumptuous to claim a monopoly of the name for Rome - particularly since The Pantheon is the official name of the Paris one, whereas it is only a popular name for the Church of the Mary and all the Martyr Saints in Rome. Adam 06:58, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
--No, the Roman Pantheon is "The" Pantheon. Granted, its current official name is the Church of Mary and all the Martyr Saints (and there are other Pantheons), but that is because the Catholic Church changed the name and converted the building into a Christian church (rather than a pagan temple to "all the gods," that is, "Pantheon"). It has always been popularly known as the Pantheon, and the Parisian Pantheon is only named that because it was modeled on the Roman original. ---Of course, having looked up your profile, I realize you probably know such things... which I suppose means that I would rather you clarify and further defend your position... of course, why I should expect you to do that considering you made the statement I was replying to in 2004, I do not know.
Didn't the Barberini Popes order that the bronze work from the Pantheon be melted down to be used in making the baldachin in St. Peter's Basilica. There was a saying, "Ciò che non hanno fatto i barbari hanno fatto i Barberini" or similar (What the barbarians didn't do, the Barberini did). It would be good to verify and add this. MPolo 13 Aug 2004
I made an edit to this page before I was a registered user (the one about Hadrian keeping the same wording in the inscription after rebuilding) and it was kept. Is there any way I can retrospectivly get this on to the "my contributions" list now I have a user name, etc? Thanks. Jaimzc 26 Oct 2004
May I suggest another name? Pantheon (Rome), so it is easier to drop the (Rome) bit when it is necessary.--Panairjdde 09:18, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Santa Maria ad Martyres
This is just to explain my reverting what was a thoughtful and well-intentioned change, from "Santa Maria ad Martyres" to "Sancta Maria ad Martyres"; now back to "Santa" with no C.
The Italian name of the church is in Italian — not as obvious as it might sound, since one or two churches in Rome have no Italian name (the church of Domine Quo Vadis? comes to mind, complete with its question mark) — thus "Santa Maria" with no C. The "ad Martyres" bit is indeed Latin, though, and you'd 'spect "Sancta"; but alas for system for all of us, it doesn't work that way.... Some churches in Rome named on similar principles do have distinct Italian and Latin names (here the church of S. Pietro in Vincoli = S. Petri ad Vincula is a good example), but others, even in Italian, keep a hybrid name, and this is the case here. (Yet others, one can't tell, since the Italian and the Latin are the same, as S. Maria in Via Lata).
The same hybrid naming occasionally applies to Italian geographical names; there is, for example, a hamlet in Umbria called "S. Pietro Aquaeortus", in which Peter speaks Italian but the springs bubble away in Latin. The situation is much more frequent in England, with names like Lyme Regis, Cerne Abbas, etc. — Best, Bill 22:32, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oop. I was formatting a new illus. at the same time and missed this. I thought: Sancta Maria ad Martyres" or "Santa Maria ai Martiri." Reasonable, but wrong. I'll fix my blunder. --Wetman 22:36, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
yes
I've found a nice photo of the bronze doors here: http://www.vroma.org/images/mcmanus_images/paula_chabot/engineering/pcengin.31.jpg
Am in the process of tracking down the copyright owner for permission to add to this article...
[edit] Images
I removed a couple of images, since there are already a lot of them, in comparison to the article lenght. If you think your images deserve to be published, add them to wikicommons' page on Commons:Pantheon (Roma).--Panairjdde 09:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Nazi architecture
Why's Nazi architecture in the list of the See alsos? As far as I know, Adolf Hitler and the Pantheon have nothing in common, really. -- SoothingR 06:44, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- Incorrect, Hitler luved the Pantheon and based the Volkshalle on it. Battlefield 20:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Paragraph on thinking skills
This paragraph was added by User:222.154.59.153 to the bottom of the article:
- thinking skills is related to the pantheon as the romans used to go there for lectures on problem solving. This is where schools orginated from, the first ever school was in the pantheon and only the wealthy could attend as you had to give quite alot of money. Money in rome was very rare and most people usually had one or two solid gold hand cut circles which had the current King stamped in on the back. People didn't usually pay up money, they usually payed up in favor, so they might have to do some sort of job for them.
I really don't see anything here that can be salvaged. --Kwekubo 19:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dome
This article claims that the dome of the Duomo in Florence is larger than that of the Pantheon. Yet, the article on the Duomo claims that it is smaller than the dome of St. Peters, and the article for St. Peter's claims that its dome is smaller than the dome of the Pantheon. This is, of course, logically impossible. I bring it up mainly because I have always read that the Pantheon had the largest dome until the Superdome was built in the 20th century. So, this should either be removed or clarified.
[edit] What if it rains?
I think it may not be a pleasant experience to be in the Pantheon when it rains. -- Toytoy 00:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- On the contrary, one of the great experiences of Rome is to visit the building in the rain. It can be spectacular, and depending on the light a cylinder of wetness - and the floor is reflective etc. the floor is raised a bit at the center so that it does not pool and the water drains somewhere in the perimeter. not sure how the drainage works, but the Roman engineers figured it all out.Brosi 01:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I love Rome. -- Toytoy 03:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] need better plan
Can't we get a more up-to-date plan and/or section. This one does not show the library in the back and is therefore actually wrong. A better section can be found at
or
There are better ones.Brosi 22:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] tensile strength ?
Domes only need high compressive strength, not tensile strength. Concrete has high compressive strength. What's the problem with building large domes out of concrete? I think that information needs checking, but I'm not a specialist. Anyone can help? --Rnbc 01:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bronze plates
The following has been removed by a recent editor: It was covered with gilded bronze plates. I think that bronze plates were indeed removed from the Pantheon, perhaps by Sixtus V. Any information?--Wetman 01:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] PANTHEON
i think the article is exellent —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.133.69.25 (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC).
[edit] A gremlin?
The following seems impossible: "The apse painting of Glory of all the Saints (1544) was painted by Giovanni Guerra." The year 1544 is Guerra's birth date, and the redecoration is said to have been commisioned by Pope Clement XI. Can anyone untangle this? My TCI Roma e Dontorni (1965) offers no details. --Wetman 07:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC) I likely put that in from some source. Giovanni Guerra worked also for Clement VIII. That is the likely answer, but to be safe, I will delete the commission note. CARAVAGGISTI 12:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Citations
More citations neededUser:Kushal_one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.163.1 (talk) 11:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vandal recovery needed
On Sept 28, this page was vandalized, including deletions of section headers. Later edits did not recover these properly, and additional material was added on. Does anyone have time for a careful reconstruction that respects both? Mlouns 18:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] took out some text
There is no evidence that the Pantheon was ever actually used. Nor is it certain that there was an altar at the center. REMOVED: "When the Pantheon was still dedicated to the Roman gods, the large number of flames for all the gods produced a vast amount of smoke which escaped out the top. When it rained, water would not be an issue because the smoke would keep the rain from falling through the Great Eye.[citation needed]"(Brosi 19:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC))
- I have removed more text of a similar nature, and tried to qualify the rest as theory. We really have no idea how it may or may not have been used. Resistor (talk) 23:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] simplistic opening
The opening paragraph is quite simplistic (compared to the relative sophistication of the article itself)."It is the best preserved of all Roman buildings, and perhaps the best preserved building of its age in the world." Well it is the best preserved because it was made into a church by the Christians who tore down most of the other temples. That it "has been in continuous use throughout its history." What does this mean. it seems that the Romans actually after hadrian's death did not use the building and even if they did it was used very differently than today. Doe any body want to rephrase the beginning??? (Brosi 19:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC))
- Actually, that's reasonably accurate. It does not seem to have been completely abandoned in the same way that, say, the Flavian Amphitheatre (the Colosseum), or any of the other huge temples of antiquity. The best I can say is: look up an image of the remains of the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, and compare it to the state of the Pantheon. Resistor (talk) 23:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inaccuracies in this entry
Considering how many scholarly books and articles have been published on the Pantheon is especially tragic that this entry is riddled with inaccuracies from start to finish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.144.147.170 (talk) 23:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- My father, a professor of classical architecture who has studied the Pantheon significantly, went through this article with me, and we have tried to improve many sections of it. In particular, the old versions presented as facts many things that are debated theories (particularly assertions about the identity of the architect and the uses of the building in antiquity). We have tried to make it clear when a statement is a popular theory as opposed to a proven fact. Resistor (talk) 23:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] inconsistency in medieval history section
The history --> medieval history section contains an inconsistency. It says the pantheon was immune from spoliation, then it describes its spoliation. Could someone please fix this? 203.221.127.208 13:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] pantheon vs. pantheum
I have significant experience with Latin writing (particularly about art and architecture), and have never encountered the word 'pantheon' used a word in Latin. My experience has been that it is always 'pantheum' in Latin, and 'pantheon' in Greek. Can anyone provide a reference for this usage? If not, I'll change the entry. Resistor (talk) 03:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pasquino quote
Can anyone provide insight into the connection between the Pasquino quote and the Pantheon? The article explains the connection poorly. Resistor (talk) 04:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Raphael's tomb
The translation of the epitaph on Raphael’s tomb is really terrible and doesn’t make a lot of sense. How about this, a much better translation, by the poet Mowbray.
Behold Great Raphael entombed here,
Whom, living, Nature’s very soul did fear,
For She did see, her works he would outvie,
And now in death doth fear herself to die. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leightonmowbray (talk • contribs) 18:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- While I haven't reviewed the translation currently in place, I'm generally in favor of a literal translation over a poetic/interpretive one. If you feel that the current translation is inaccurate, please leave more information as to why. Resistor (talk) 09:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
If you want a literal translation, you will need to write ‘The great parent of things’. The other translator did grasp the figurative meaning of ‘Nature’. The literal translation runs as follows: HIC=here EST=is RAPHAEL TIMUIT=feared QUO=who SOSPITE=living VINCI=conquer (surpass/ defeat) / RERUM= things MAGNA =great PARENS=parent ET=and MORIENTE=dying MORI=to die. Now the poet Mowbray takes the literal words and places them, without altering the meaning, into iambic pentameter. Thus the meaning is retained while the essence is transformed into verse. Remember that the original form was in two lines of verse in six metrical feet. The technique of translating Latin verse into English pentameter was invented by the poet Chaucer, and cultivated by the Bard. It is now kept alive by Mowbray. Leightonmowbray (talk) 19:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] fulfillment
built to represent all gods, it is claimed, but that amounts to the only 1 god, and so built to that end; fulfilled by Dec 1970 visit of God on earth, as forseen by seers 2500 yrs before. /s/ lil zeus sr 76.195.232.219 (talk) 20:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
