| Revision as of 09:15, 17 January 2007 editSmackBot (talk | contribs)3,734,324 editsm Date/fix the maintenance tags← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:56, 14 February 2007 edit undoSimonesj (talk | contribs)3 edits The history in this article seems contradictoryNext edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| =="Expand"== | =="Expand"== | ||
| In which direction is expansion being requested? I have removed the tag from the head of the article itself, as unnecessarily disfiguring. Any concrete requests for expansion? --] 12:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC) | In which direction is expansion being requested? I have removed the tag from the head of the article itself, as unnecessarily disfiguring. Any concrete requests for expansion? --] 12:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == The history in this article seems contradictory == | |||
| On the one hand, the article states, "after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire the Capitoline Wolf was housed until 1471 in San Teodoro..." | |||
| On the other hand, the article also states, "The bronze wolf was said to have been unearthed under the northwest spur of Palatine Hill, and was noted at the Lateran Palace from the beginning of the 9th century." | |||
| There are two parallel histories presented here. In the first, it seems the wolf was never lost in late antiquity, and remained in the Church of St. Theodore until it was moved to the Capitoline museum in 1471. | |||
| In the second, the wolf WAS lost, and only unearthed on the Palatine in the ninth century, after which it was on display at the Lateran palace law court. | |||
| Any way to explain the contradiction, or to smooth it out? | |||
| ] 11:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:56, 14 February 2007
|
An entry from Capitoline Wolf appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 29 April, 2006. |  |
Dimensions?
Online documentation for this statuary is sorely lacking. I tried for two hours to find the dimensions of it, and could not. I know the one in Georgia is supposedly an full-size replica, and according to it, it weighs 1500 lbs. Looking at it in context in front of the City Hall steps, it appears to measure about 2 ft x 3 ft. Any help? Iamvered 03:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- Googling "Lupa Capitolina cm" found the measurement in centimeters, now added to the article. --Wetman 12:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Ambiguity
"When the twins' grandfather Numitor was overthrown by his brother Amulius, he ordered them to be cast into the River Tiber." Who did - Numitor or Amulius? PiCo
- I've re-edited, so that no one could be confused.--Wetman 19:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
The added twins
That the twins were added in the Renaissance is a commonplace of popular travel guides, which, with ninety seconds' worth of googling, might have been confirmed for even the least informed. I have added the NY Times travel guide to the articles "references" (!) but the online Frommer Guide has this: "...you'll find Lupa Capitolina (Capitoline Wolf), a rare Etruscan bronze that could date from the 5th century B.C. (Romulus and Remus, the legendary twins who were suckled by the wolf, were added at a later date.)" The attribution to Pollaiuolo (noted as "possible") in my edit, is also a commonplace, though not quite so universal: "The figures of the twins, Romulus and Remus, being suckled by the Wolf (lupus), were added by Antonio Pollaiuolo in the 15th Century." Now that it's been pointed out, I'm sure that a cursory inspection of the wolf and the twins will bear out their separate origins, even from a photograph. --Wetman 19:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
"Expand"
In which direction is expansion being requested? I have removed the tag from the head of the article itself, as unnecessarily disfiguring. Any concrete requests for expansion? --Wetman 12:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
The history in this article seems contradictory
On the one hand, the article states, "after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire the Capitoline Wolf was housed until 1471 in San Teodoro..."
On the other hand, the article also states, "The bronze wolf was said to have been unearthed under the northwest spur of Palatine Hill, and was noted at the Lateran Palace from the beginning of the 9th century."
There are two parallel histories presented here. In the first, it seems the wolf was never lost in late antiquity, and remained in the Church of St. Theodore until it was moved to the Capitoline museum in 1471.
In the second, the wolf WAS lost, and only unearthed on the Palatine in the ninth century, after which it was on display at the Lateran palace law court.
Any way to explain the contradiction, or to smooth it out?