Talk:Sidonius Apollinaris

Eastern Christianity?
Why has Sidonius been assigned to be a part of the Eastern Christianity series? Djnjwd 21:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

From the Life section.
In the "Life" section we find these words;

"Sidonius was born in Lugdunum (Lyons). His father Apollinaris (born circa 405) was the Prefect of Gaul under Valentinian III between 425 and 455 and the son of another Apollinaris, who was Praetorian Prefect of Gaul before 409 and a friend of his successor Decimus Rusticus. He seems to be a descendant of another Apollinaris, Prefect of Gaul under Constantine II between 337 and 340." Since some non professional historians, such as my self, consider this man as another possibly misunderstood personality of the past, and possibly related to the "Authurian" theories, then maybe we might well consider his presumed place of birth, which is reported to be (from less than reliable sources) to be "Lyon(s)", now found within the boundaries of France (then called Gaul).

But, it assumed by some respected scholars that "Lyon" is but a variation of "Lion", etc.! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.19.156.227 (talk) 21:57, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I made a mistake when I entered the above remarks. Here I wish to clarify and extend them however. I merely wanted to point out a possible connection between the name "Apollinaris", is some what connected to the word "Lyon" in its form as "Lion!"

Thus perhaps this site concerning coins might well elicit some response? http://rjohara.net/coins/apollo-lion-persic/96.19.156.227 (talk) 22:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes


 * I may perhaps not be understanding your point, but the English word "lion" derives from the Latin leo, leontis (Greek leon). Lyon or Lyons derives from Lugdunum, for which see Lugdunum. See Apollinaris for the derivation of the name. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Actually, the name of Sidonius' father was is not known for certain -- although "Apollinaris" is one common guess. And the only connection I've seen made between Sidonius & Lyons/Lugdunum is that he went to school in that city. I really need to get to this article & add some material from the scholarly secondary sources. -- llywrch (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Sidonius Apollinaris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141018233446/http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/journals/EH/EH37/Goldberg.html to http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/journals/EH/EH37/Goldberg.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Aug 23 in Roman Martyrology
See here. What is the source for Aug. 22?--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 01:53, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Manuscript tradition "excessive detail"?
I noticed the ugly banner on this section that was added this month and am confused about why it was viewed as necessary. The first three sentences seem fairly straightforward and definitely relevant to understanding how his works were transmitted, a basic point of interest in an article on an author. The fourth sentence uses the technical term stemmatics, which I was not particularly familiar with, but links to the article that explains this term. I guess the rest of the discussion of stemmatics is a bit technical but this article is hardly excessively long, and I see no reason to remove accurate and relevant facts (I am also confused about whether the suggestion about "spinning off or relocating any relevant information" is actually meant to apply, or is just boilerplate: what relocation would make sense here?). @Vicedomino, could you comment on what improvements you wanted to see here? Is the template targeted at the final sentences of the section? Urszag (talk) 08:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I was being somewhat polite. I believe the whole subsection should be deleted, since it has nothing to do with Sidonius Apollinaris, and adds nothing to our understanding of the man or his career. The audience for such information in an encyclopedia is non-existent. Stemmatics begins in the mid-nineteenth century, by scholars attempting to produce more accurate texts (Lachmann, et all.). Not everything that is known is notable.
 * The business of "spinning off or relocating of any relevant information" is indeed boilerplate, though the word relevant does, IMO, apply.
 * Vicedomino (talk) 08:39, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't understand how information about the manuscripts of his works could be irrelevant when he is largely notable for being an author.--Urszag (talk) 11:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)