Quantum redactiones paginae "Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 12" differant

:In sum, I don't think there is a consensus amongst latinists about what should be done about this issue.--[[Usor:Rafaelgarcia|Rafaelgarcia]] 23:13, 17 Augusti 2009 (UTC)
::Which is why I suggested, a couple of years ago (it seems), that there be at least two Latin wikis: a Classical one and one that accepts the grammatical & lexical & phonetic changes that happened later. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] 23:57, 17 Augusti 2009 (UTC)
:::I assume you are being humorous? Classical or Roman wikipedia which you want would only be an encyclopedia of the Classical age. Great to find out about togas and chariots and stuff, but precious little use for anything else. Dr Bradley's statement that the whole of latinity can be found in the works of Cicero, Caesar and Livy, as well as being a lot of nonsens, is very representative of a Victorian, Anglosaxon Protestant view of history - noble virtuous Romans , benighted superstitious Mediaevals. It is remarkable, but very telling, that the Latin dictionaries of that period never cite the greatest Latinist of all time (in volume, at least, even if you dispute his greatness otherwise), Augustine. He of course put forward the radical view in De Civitate Dei that Classical civilisation was a heap of ordure, and that the Romans in their history had been more barbarian than those they liked to call barbarian. Latin outside the Anglosaxon world has fortunately been rather more catholic, in every sense of the word - so that the enthusiasm of our American contributors for archaic Latin to them may look rather bemusing.[[Specialis:Conlationes/|]] 07:16, 18 Augusti 2009 (UTC)
== Errata corrige... ==
Usor anonymus