Talk:Persecution of pagans under Theodosius I

Concision and Chronology
This entry is a mess. It repeats facts and descriptions of events several times, often in the same words. It jumps about chronologically. It ascribes motives and inner thoughts to historical personages as if they were fictional characters, etc. it really needs a thorough editing and reorganization. 108.54.57.244 (talk) 00:30, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Name Change
Why on earth was the title of this article changed without any discussion or consensus? EXTREMELY bad form. I would revert it myself, but I don't know how. If you're able, please revert the article title to "Persecution of Paganism under Theodosius I". It's much more likely someone would search for it (and find it) rather than this obviously apologetic redirect. To be honest... It's not even an improvement, at that (in fact, in my opinion, it's quite the opposite). It also no longer corresponds to the titles on foreign language wikipedias (which isn't necessary, but generally the way it should go). It wasn't a unified, singular policy, so this title isn't necessarily even correct. But it was persecution. It seems this might be a religiously motivated edit. I'll step off my proverbial soapbox now. I just find this edit both a bit ridiculous, and in bad taste. If you're able, whoever is reading this, please revert the title; this redirect is quite obviously a violation of policy and practice on Wikipedia; Thank you in advance to whomever the wonderful editor is that reverts it back! - Kaelus (sorry I'm not signed in)

Extirpium malum???
The article says: according to the Christian sources authorized by Theodosius (extirpium malum) needs to be seen against a complicated background of less spectacular violence in the city

Does such a word as "extirpium" even exist in Latin? Any source for that? I cannot find it in any dictionary, neither O.L.D. or medieval ones. -95.49.43.5 (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Recommendation.
Place ' pagan ' in quotes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.39.108.47 (talk) 00:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

persecution of paganism
Paganism is a concept or description of a way of believing or living. One cannot persecute a concept; only living people may be persecuted. I suggest that the article's title be changed to reflect that fact. What about "Suppression of paganism under Theodosius I" or "Persecution of pagans under Theodosius". Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Copyright violations from non RS
shows copyright violations from a non-reliable source; it's a blog on geneology. This ] is also a blog called Helenicaworld. This is headbanging wine.com.cabernet and the next is headbanging wine.com.merlot.

That means most of this article should be deleted. All of it should be replaced with reliable quality sources properly paraphrased. I will tag it accordingly and begin working on it. Anyone who wants to do so, please participate in this reconstruction. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:22, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I had stumbled upon this article awhile ago and also thought it should be deleted. Is there really room for improvement here or can all the relevant info be conveyed at Theodosius's own article (as already is, in fact)? Avilich (talk) 19:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Btw, this article was originally split(?) from Religious persecution in the Roman Empire and Decline of Greco-Roman polytheism, as was Anti-paganism policies of the early Byzantine Empire, Anti-paganism policy of Constantius II, Anti-paganism influenced by Saint Ambrose, and Restoration and tolerance of Paganism from Julian until Valens. Several of these, including this one, are B-rated despite the trove of outdated information and sources. I think the useful information (which seems to be few in number) should just be pasted at persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire and these individual pages eliminated. Avilich (talk) 19:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I was hoping you Avilich would show up! I need your input! I have begun rewriting it in my sandbox, but frankly confess I am taking info from other articles I have written - which is legal on WP - and pasting and summarizing it here. Virtually no new research required, so yes, you are right as usual, the information here is ridiculously outdated and more accurate info is available elsewhere. That probably does mean the best approach to all of these would be deletion. Certainly this one, as it offers nothing new, is entirely sourced from either primary sources or blogs, and is plagiarized to boot. Can we declare a consensus, or do we have to put it up for deletion and wait? Do you know? I've never deleted an article before.Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:15, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Deleting this will be difficult because the title sounds inherently plausible to the less informed reader, even if we both know that historians don't think Theodosius was a zealot and an active persecutor. I'd broach the subject on WP:CGR and try to get the project's members on board with deleting these articles before submitting them for AfD. The 'restoration and tolerance' one should be easy to delete, but the rest might require their support. If you're unsure how to proceed I can open a discussion in the project and tag you there. Avilich (talk) 19:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC) In fact, I might do just that, with your permission. I think I know what to say and who to tag. When a consensus is reached, an AfD can be created and the project's members notified of it so they can vote. This may all very well take several weeks. Avilich (talk) 19:32, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * well? do I have your permission to start a discussion there and tag you as one who instigated this? Avilich (talk) 20:46, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay Avilich I have been off-line for a bit. Company just left. Yes of course you have my support. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Possible deletion
A discussion about possibly deleting this article is taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. Avilich (talk) 03:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Avilich I am going out of town for a week beginning Monday morning. I will attempt to keep up with this as much as possible from my phone, but if I am out of touch for awhile it doesn't mean anything. I'll be back. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:56, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

A case for deletion
This B-rated article is replete with original research, inaccuracies, unsourced statements, outdated reference material, and primary sources taken out of context. Here's an overview of the problems.
 * Theodosius "established a practical ban on paganism",   "he authorized or participated in the destruction of many temples, holy sites, images and objects of piety throughout the empire", "Theodosius ended the subsidies that had still trickled to some remnants of Greco-Roman civic paganism", he "is likely to have suppressed the Ancient Olympic Games", "the Vestal Virgins were disbanded", Ambrose blackmailed Theodosius into creating anti-pagan laws, and Eugenius restored "the ancestral religious rites" and the Altar of Victory.   Variants of these claims are repeated throughout the article, and they are contradicted by the references here cited.
 * This article contains heavy amounts of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH based on the Codex Theodosianus. It's broadly agreed that its laws are closer to being ad hoc decrees than universal policy, so taking them at face value will often lead to overstatements and incorrect conclusions.
 * Once these factors are removed from consideration, the article is left with various unsourced and unencyclopedic statements, such as "Theodosius was not the man to sympathise with the balancing policy of the Edict of Milan" and "he needed the support of the influential pagan ruling class and the percentage of non-Christians in the general population was still quite large, perhaps 50% overall". Aside from these we have a few anecdotes in the end describing Christian vandalism, referenced to MacMullen 1984 (possibly the only WP:RS consistently cited in this article), but there is little effort to connect them with Theodosius.

This covers most of the article, of which there's little, if anything, to salvage, in my opinion. It's probably best to deal with the subject in Theodosius I and persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire. Avilich (talk) 17:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Paganism, the junk drawer of Late Antiquity
The redaction of this article has non-sense, how can be "paganism" be surpress in X year and then after few lines repeat that was surpressed in Y year? This article needs to clarify what concrete practice was abolish. Furthermore, how can one speak of persecution if in this same article and in other reports there are sources that indicate that there was no systematic persecution by the State, but vandalism at specific points and for a short time? 83.58.155.48 (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 7 November 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 16:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Persecution of pagans under Theodosius I → Religious policies of Theodosius I – Religious policies is more exact 83.58.26.9 (talk) 14:14, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose, for the same reasons as at Talk:Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire. This is a valid topic whose contents are defined by and consistent with the current title.  Change the title, and you convert the article into something else inconsistent with those contents.  Together with your other edits, you seem to be trying to absolve Christian rulers of responsibility for actions and policies that mainstream historians still ascribe to them—and this is inconsistent with WP:NPoV.  P Aculeius (talk) 14:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose Aculeius summed it up pretty well. Again.★Trekker (talk) 17:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)