Disputatio:Zoroastrismus
 |
Lemmata
recensereI changed the initial sentence back to how it was because (a) I don't think we have any rule that the pagename has to agree with the first lemma, though of course it most often does, (b) in this case, if putting modern "Zoroastrismus" first, and "religio Zoroastrea" second, it's quite difficult to write a sentence that suits the pair of them, doesn't make false claims, and isn't painfully repetitive. "Olim religio Zoroastrea" wasn't exactly right because we don't know that anyone ever used this phrase: but the phrase is (temporarily) OK for us because it is made up of words from real early Latin sources. "Zoroastrismus" has not been found in a Latin text, but it's (temporarily) OK for us because German authors sometimes invent technical terms of good scientific Latin form, like this one. And all of this will be unnecessary as soon as someone finds a term meaning "the Zoroastrian religion" in a real Latin source! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:59, 6 Augusti 2020 (UTC)