Talk:Appian

message: I'm a little bit confused by the reference to Appian's writing style being unattractive.  I can't read the Greek, but my translation always seemed quite readable.  Can someone explain what's so unattractive about his Greek? SetarconeX 18:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I see a long excerpt from Appian's history pasted in the paragraph under the heading Works.  I don't see the point of this cut-and-paste. Although it allegedly illustrates Appian's ethnographic approach to writing history, in my view it does not succeed in this aim. I realize I'm just one person, but I do know that Wikipedia's policy is to write well-organized, informative articles.
Does anybody agree or disagree that this excerpt should be removed from this article? Thuvan Dihn (talk) 04:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is now 2014, so I don't know if the excerpt was removed or not.  As of now, I see no long exerpt, neither do I understand how removing a excerpt would make the article more well-organized or more informative.  I can't see anything to gain by removing an excerpt.  And in fact I find such helpful and informative.  (EnochBethany (talk) 21:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long excerpt under Works 

message: Under Life I see the phrase "during the coregency, i.e., between 147 and 161." Although I know what a coregency is, I have no idea what this means in context. I gather that Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus were co-emperors from 161 to 169, but I don't know of any other coregency in the period between 100 and 160 A.D.
Can anybody shed any light on this passage? Thuvan Dihn (talk) 04:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The coregency? 

message: The article states, "…Appian moved in 120 to Rome, where he became a barrister."  Is "barrister" an anachronism?  Was Roman law practiced like British law where you have solicitors vs barristers?  Should the term be "lawyer," a rather general term which doesn't carry with it images of British barristers wearing wigs?  Unless someone defends "barrister," I am inclined to change the term to laywer. (EnochBethany (talk) 20:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Barrister or Lawyer?

message: The article states, "whom he did not follow uncritically,…."  Should this be changed to "whom he followed critically" or "whom he followed cautiously"?  What does the article mean here?  (EnochBethany (talk) 20:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally, there is a conflict between this article and the article on Pollio, which states this historian's works were a source for Appian.HammerFilmFan (talk) 09:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Is This Confusing Double Negative Needed?

message: "Of the ancient sources of history with regard to the contest
 within the Roman Republic, Appian alone gives us plain and
 clear information respecting its final cause,
 which was property in land.[Pg 117]"
This is according to Frederick Engels in a work "Feuerbach: The roots of the socialist philosophy". Translated by Austin Lewis. Copyright, 1903
By Charles H. Kerr & Company.
My source being Project Gutenberg http://www.gutenberg.org/files/27814/27814-h/27814-h.htm
There is no mention made in this article on Apian regarding this important aspect of his work. Perhaps someone could confirm this.withaak 17:31, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engels on Appian