Talk:Suda

Cleanup
The categories indicate two encyclopedia sources - you could probably guess without looking! Much of the information is repeated. It should be rewritten to combine the two. John (Jwy) 00:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Suda style
I browsed a bit of the online version of the Suda... clearly, its author(s) didn't follow a policy of NPOV... there are some pretty vicious attacks on non-Christian religions in it (the entry on Adam gives a highly condensed summary of the history of the world after the first man, which refers to the pantheons of pagan gods/godesses as horrendous distortions of the true God unleashed on the world by the Devil, with the female ones being particularly evil.) *Dan T.* 22:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

10th or 11th century?
Article says: "under Constantinople his successors Basil II (976-1025) and Constantine VIII (1025-1028) are mentioned. It would thus appear that the Suda was compiled in the latter part of the 10th century." To mention Constantine VIII it would have be be 11c. 24.233.254.29 (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

...which raises a question as to all 'XX century' references in the article. Should they be all one century later? xzar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.169.220.17 (talk) 08:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

History of the text after initial composition?
Some information on how widespread this was, its influence on later writers and thinkers, existing manuscripts, early printed editions etc. would be useful. Thanks! -- 77.7.142.13 (talk) 02:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Dubious: Dacians, Pechenegs, Romanians
According to Victor Spinei: "An entry in the so-called Suidas lexicon drawn up at some point during the second half of the tenth century, claims that Dacians were now called Pechenegs. This can only mean that the Pechenegs werre ruling over the lands of ancient Dacia, which were inhabited at that time by Romanians." . Consequently, the Suda itself clearly identified the Pechenegs as Dacians; therefore, the statement in the article about the Suda's reference to the Romanians under the ethnonym "Dacian" is clearly misleading. I assume, that that statement is actually an original synthesis of sentences from the cited scholarly work (Brezeanu's book). Could anybody verbatim cite what Brezeanu wrote on this subject in his cited work? Thank you in advance. Borsoka (talk) 11:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

THE Suda Suggestion
This work is correctly referred to in the article with the definite article, but it's missing from the title. I propose it be moved to "The Suda" with a redirect here. - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 00:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)