User talk:Aza24/sandbox

Comments on literature

1st para

• I suggest cutting this for two reasons. To scope it down so it's less about Greek and more about the empire; to reduce word count. The strongest points and to keep are "the vast majority of extant texts are in Greek. and that there is debate on what is the scope, an important point. Biz (talk) 03:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  Good points, I've cut it substantially and combined it with the second paragraph. I'll move what I can to the rather poor Byzantine literature article. – Aza24 (talk) 04:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

• "Byzantine Greek". I read Papaioannou and he makes a point that although it was Greek, there were many other languages and it's important to know that. That is to say Byzantine literature is different from Byzantine Greek. I'm wondering if there is another source we can confirm what is an appropriate way to call the language at that time? The page itself redirects to Medieval Greek and makes mention of Romaic for example, which is how I know it (that's what modern Greeks call it). Biz (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Some of the material explaining this was in the previous version, which I've since cut. I've restored an amended version of it, perhaps that helps? The linguistic variaties are hard to pigeon hole, I think the term Byzantine Greek only exists as an umbrella for them, but its worth referencing since that article at least discusses the discintction. – Aza24 (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
    • That's an improvement, but since you make the distinction of the types of Greek, and the link redirects to "medieval Greek, just drop the word Byzantine. "Byzantine" and "medieval" are both problematic words associated with bias so the less we need to use them the better. Biz (talk) 21:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
      • Indeed, now removed that. I'm thinking this is ready to go, but if you'd rather go through the references first (as you indicated below), that's fine by me. – Aza24 (talk) 21:49, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
        • I think this is huge improvement from what currently exists so go ahead! I prefer to see all the sources myself for any of the content we have on this article, but I can always review later. Biz (talk) 22:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

• You linked to medieval Christianity but that page refers to after the fall of the western province in 476 and does not cover the period you reference which is 330 onwards; the link to paganism is too broad, might be better to link it to Religion in ancient Rome? Biz (talk) 22:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

2nd para

• I like this paragraph and think it should lead. The only thing I don't like is the reference to "new empire". We need to stay neutral on this periodisation of history, so drop new. Also, no page numbers, could not validate the source. Biz (talk) 03:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  Dropped new. The Oxford reference doesn't give page numbers for these individual entries. – Aza24 (talk) 04:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  @Biz: Added page numbers from the print edition – Aza24 (talk) 19:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

  Nice. Will try to confirm references when I have time this week. Biz (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

3rd para

• Well written. Would be nice if if we can beef up the references to something in the last 10-20 years. Biz (talk) 03:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  I'll give this a go, but its unlikely. It appears that Byzantine literature is the least studied aspect of Byzantine culture; there was no English survey on the whole period's literature until the 2021 handbook, which I'll try to use more of. Aza24 (talk) 04:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)