Talk:Gabii

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Classical Greece and Rome This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This is quite an insightful and detailed piece. I just have a few comments that might help clarify this page a little more.

1) "This was advantageous.....except south". South of what?

2) "People had inhabited the area that would come to hold the city since the middle bronze age". This sentence is unclear.

3) "Gabii was the ally of Rome after 493 BC". How about just "an ally"?

~Benji Derman

There is a lot of information here, maybe a couple of headings would help the readers? I was thinking: general info, Gabii is the past, Gabii now. I'm sure you could make it sound more elegant.

I spotted one spelling mistake: 'repubblican'.

64.241.37.140 20:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Erzhe Zhang[reply]

This article is very interesting and informative. I appreciate the detail that you have included, and coming from several different angles or perspectives gives the article a sense of validity. Seeing that you have already taken the suggestions of the above commenters, there is not much left to say. Your categorization is very strong and clarifies your information. The only suggestions I would make are fairly simple. If you could include a see also section, that would help for even further clarification. It would be up to you what articles you would deem relavent, But I would suggest Ancient Rome, or Roman Ruins. Also, I don't know if you are willing to bother with complicated image stuff (I had some problems with it) but Vroma.org has a lot of images, and if you could include one of the Ruins, it would give the page a more appealing look.

-Danni Brancaccio

I'm sure it would Mr. Brancaccio but those pics have to be on Commons before we can use any with a suitable copyright. I certainly would like to see that. The recent archaeological interest in the site has resulted in some outstanding photos. If anyone is inclined and skilled in checking such things out and bringing them into commons they certainly would enhance this article and make it a lot easier to write. Any of you archaeologists or archaeological students care to donate some pics for us?Dave (talk) 11:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can all see on the map that the former lake is filled. I can't really find anything substantial on who filled it and when. There is a random comment about Mussolini on the Gabii project site. It is obvious on the Internet that Il Duce turned his attention to the Pontine Marshes and the Maremma in the days of his glory but nothing at all nowhere about filling this lake, which was not in any major problem area, so I regard the project's comment as an insubstantial guess, probably by a student. One author says it was filled even in ancient times. Another author says it was in the 19th century. Neither gives any supporting detail. No doubt it was filled by some people at some time. Typically projects such as this are worked on by many leaders of state in various historical periods. No doubt the information exists in archives and good libraries in Italy. In my judgement until some one of us can find something substantial and is willing and able to report that we are better off not saying anything so I am temporarily going to remove the unsupported Mussolini statement. We could support it with the archaeological project statement, but what's the point? It too is unsupported. They probably got it from Wikipedia. It is time to temper this ridiculous round robin of fables. Il Duce liked to complete projects at which previous regimes failed for publicity purposes: the "mine is bigger" psychology. Lake Gabino could not have been an especially difficult problem; it wasn't very big. I don't think he turned a hand there at all. If anyone KNOWS differently and can prove it, by all means expand it a little.Dave (talk) 10:45, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More on the topic. Apparently the lake was empty by 1850. It was observed being drained by canals in 1846. The draining was the project of the Borghese family, the owners of the lake, who apparently wished to relieve the malaria decimating the region. I have no idea what Il duce could have done. I suspect, this is just another student myth.Dave (talk) 06:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"This was an advantageous location as it was close to routes that ran north, east, and west." I don't think so. It was only on the Via Praeneste and was isolated among lakes and swamps. To the north the Anio effectively cut it off and to the south Lake Regillus was impassible. The only advantage it had besides being across the main road to Praeneste and being too near Rome for comfort was being in an impregnable spot on the top of a cliff. It was most definitely not a crossroads, back then. It still isn't. The crossroads is Finocchio, which did not exist. I notice that the ref given lists no article or page number. In fact, all the refs seem to be divided up evenly between three non-viewable encyclopedias with no article names or pages. Excuse me but I think you made it up. The skilled classical encyclopedists never would have made such a glaring error. I'm making the appropriate adjustments.Dave (talk) 14:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I found the theory. Smith uses the presentation on Osteria dell'Osa to concoct a very strange theory, which (secretly realizing its incompetance) he prompty adduces authors to contradict. He has no confidence in it but he wishes to propose it without really proposing it. In this theory, which only shows that Smith has little knowledge of geology, the lake was empty in ancient times, as it was only mentioned in the 5th century AD. He suggests (by indirect hint) that the Fossa dell'Osa filled it, and that prior to then the necropoleis on either side of the lake were connected and the basin was full of primitive settlements. It was, he suggests, a major road center. He adduces an ancient road on the west side of the lake leading to the Anio, but then turns around and destroys the whole theory by pointing out the road was not likely to have gotten past the necropolis (unlike the modern road). This theory is so out of touch with the geologic facts I am not even going to give it a footnote, but you can if you like. If the Osa connected to the lake, then why on earth did the Borghese's bother to connect it with canals? Moreover, if the canals drained the lake into the stream, how is it the stream filled it? Was there some sort of magical change in the gradation of the whole region? Does he mean to tell us this whole vast crater lake filled up in historical times without any mention at all? Moreover, the roads of any value in the region were built by the Romans. Are you trying to tell us, Mr. Smith, that before the Roman road system the Latins had an important road network in Latium with a crossroads in the empty crater lake? If you were on Wikipedia, I would say, check these things out before you publish them, will you? As I say, I judge this theory so unconfidently and speculatively presented of no merit and not worth mention here.Dave (talk) 07:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not done with this article yet but while I am working on related and supporting articles I note that there is an article on Regillus taken from 1911 Britannica. That one needs to be rewritten and much of the material in here on Regillus should be moved to there with a suitable link from here.Dave (talk) 11:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gabii. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071008234434/http://www.erechtheion.org/Docs/Masters%20Thesis%20whole.pdf to http://www.erechtheion.org/Docs/Masters%20Thesis%20whole.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:08, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]