Talk:Saluzzo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Redirect
Please redirect the pages Blessed_Juvenal_Ancina and Giuvenale_Ancina to the proper page Giovenale_Ancina now online. Thanks! Alegreen 23:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
And also Bishop_of_Saluzzo. Thanks. Alegreen 23:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- The first two are done. I took the liberty of redirecting Bishop of Saluzzo to Roman Catholic Diocese of Saluzzo instead of Giovenale Ancina, because I think that's a more appropriate article to point at. • WarpFlyght (talk) 23:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] la:Augusta Vagiennorum
After doing a bit of research, it's not clear to me whether the city bearing the Latin name Augusta Vagiennorum is Saluzzo. Various sources in several languages do seem to indicate that it is Saluzzo, for instance:
- http://www.popolodellarete.it/showthread.php?mode=hybrid&t=3089
- http://www.urbisaglia.com/RUBRICHE/Caraceni.PDF (page 16)
- la:Italia (which means the link to la:Augusta Vagiennorum and the article's content are consistent with the article on Italia)
On the other hand, I'm finding a number of sources just doing a Google search to indicate that Augusta Vagiennorum is, in fact, Bene Vagienna nearer to Fossano:
- ca:Lígurs -- describes it as located near the end of the Tanaro River, a headwater of the Po. This is consistent with the description in Augusta Bagiennorum (which I interpret to be an alternate spelling -- I may be wrong about this!).
- http://www.benevagienna.it/site/index.htm (also with the spelling Augusta Bagiennorum)
- http://www.montagnedoc.it/template_scheda.php?ID=140&tipo=scheda&cat=64 (conjectures that Vigone could be "a colony of Augusta Vagiennorum, today Bene Vagienna")
Even more confusing, a widely-referenced article on the French Wikipedia lists it as Saluzzo or Bene Vagienna:
Granted, Saluzzo and Bene Vagienna are less than 30 kilometers apart, so it could be that they're just both close to the original Augusta Vagiennorum and have equal claims as a result... Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Should it just be left as-is? • WarpFlyght (talk) 18:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)