# Talk:Jovian (emperor)

The general sense is current and much used today in astronomy. Also Perhaps the emperor should go to Jovian, Roman Emperor or Jovian (Roman Emperor)?Jorge Stolfi 17:39, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

No, this is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary.--Panairjdde 17:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This could use a disambiguation page, as the astronomy usage, the Roman emporer, the language use, and the Roman god Jupiter are enough to justify it. StuRat 18:59, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
I see only two uses, the astronomic usage, as adjective of planet Jupiter, and the Roman emperor. One is related to the dictionary, the other to the encyclopedia. I am against a disambiguation page; if you want, you can put a notice at the beginning of the page, if there exists a jovian (astronomy) article, that is.--Panairjdde 07:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
The 4 uses are:
Referring specifically to the planet Jupiter, alone.
first, astronomycal
Referring to the class of planets like Jupiter, which includes Saturn and may or may not include Uranus and Neptune.
again astronomycal,
Referring to the Roman emporer.
second
Referring to the expression "By Jove !".
Jove is not Jovian.
StuRat 03:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Again, you should understand that this is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. If you must, just write a note at the beginning of the page, something like "For the planet, see Jupiter."--Panairjdde 13:00, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly with User:Jorge Stolfi.  This article does not deserve primary disambiguation.  Someone looking for Jovian is much more likely to be looking for the adjective related to either the god or the planet named after him, and this one isn't more likely than the others on the disambiguation page.  See Wikipedia:Disambiguation, its section on deciding to disambiguate, and Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision)#If the two titles usually have a different meaning.  Or just look at some of the discussions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to see how these problems are normally resolved.
I'm not going to take further action right now, but may get back to this sometime.  Meanwhile, if anyone else renames it or takes this to Wikipedia:Requested moves, let me know on my talk page.  Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Note that inappropriate links on the article's "What links here" are one clue that a change should be made.
Note also that many of the links on "what links here" which are appropriate to this article are only there as a result of that big, ugly honking navigation box on the bottom of the page.  All of them could be fixed in one fell swoop if this article is renamed, merely by changing the link in the template.  The existence of those links due (only to that obnoxious template whose purpose would be as well served by categories and lists) on the "What links here" page makes it much more difficult to find the ones which are inappropriate to this article.
Having "Jovian" as a disambiguation page would make future cleanup of those links easier.  Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

In the beggining of the article it is stated 17. february 364. Later on, it is said that he died from a wound 26 June 363. I don't know which of those two dates are correct, but that should be corrected.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stalker314314 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC) 

This article states that Jovian issued an edict "on 11 September subjecting those who worshiped ancestral gods to the death penalty. He extended the same punishment on 23 December to participation in any pagan ceremony (even private ones)" providing a citation from "Vlasis Rassias A history of unconditional love (2005); currently in publication only in Greek, as Μια ιστορία αγάπης." I cannot speak on the credentials of this source, but this claim seems unfounded. I have never read anywhere of Jovian issuing any such laws. Based on this table here (which is based of Coleman-Norton's Roman State and Christian Church) no such laws were issued by Jovian. Unless anyone has access to Pharr's translation of the Theodosian Code or another primary or scholarly source to verify this claim, this sentence should be deleted from the article.
--TJYoung93  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TJYoung93 (talk • contribs) 06:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC) 

Do we know if Jovian adhered to the Arian or the Athanasian flavour of Christianity? If we do, it might be worth including. Q·L·1968 ☿ 04:27, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, on closer inspection, I see he was a supporter of Athanasius. I'll add something to that effect to the infobox. Q·L·1968 ☿ 23:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Although (or perhaps because) his reign was short, Jovian was the last Emperor to be be the sole Emperor of both West and East for the whole of his reign. But I can't find a citation for this. I'm new to wiki so not sure how to proceed. It's an interesting fact about Jovian, but I don't want to add someting without a source. Any suggestions?
Itcontractor  — Preceding undated comment added 20:11, 30 January 2021 (UTC) 

The sentence “he ordered the library to be burned down” is a bit strange to me, because the note next to it states that 3 sources do not mention such a thing. I think it would make more sense to reword it to “he is said to have ordered”. I tried to edit it but apparently you can’t edit articles marked as good, which is why I’m writing this. Snowsoftime (talk) 21:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Rohrmann states that certain writers do not mention the burning of the library, while Lenski states Jovian ordered the burning with no mention of other considerations.
Also other sources state,
"..while in Antioch, Jovian had the temple of Trajan, built by Hadrian and turned into a library by Julian, burned down with all the books in it." -- The Forgotten Reign of the Emperor Jovian (363-364): History and Fiction, Jan Willem Drijvers, Oxford University Press, page 62.
"The temple was turned into a library by the Emperor Julian, and was burned by the Emperor Jovian." --Ancient Antioch, Glanville Downey, Princeton University Press, page 99.
"For the temple and library, burned under Jovian..." --Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church, Susanna Elm, University of California Press, page 326.
"But when Jovian succeeded Julian , he had the library at Antioch burned down " with all its books.." --Kingdom of Snow: Roman Rule and Greek Culture in Cappadocia, Raymond Van Dam, University of Pennsylvania Press, page 200.
Clearly the academic consensus is that Jovian had the library burned
"but apparently you can’t edit articles marked as good..."
And you gave zero explanation in your edit summaries,[1][2][3][4] which makes deciding if your editing was simply vandalism or simply a misunderstanding, difficult.--Kansas Bear (talk) 22:05, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me, I’m still new to all this. Snowsoftime (talk) 22:17, 14 August 2023 (UTC)