Talk:Ancient Rome/Bibliography: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Robert Mack (New page: This is very much a work in progress right now. Clearly this is a very broad topic and I hardly know where to begin. As such I have been working on the bibliography mainly. I also think 'A...) |
imported>Richard Jensen (good start) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This is very much a work in progress right now. Clearly this is a very broad topic and I hardly know where to begin. As such I have been working on the bibliography mainly. I also think 'Ancient Rome' is very ambiguous. When I hear that I think of the city proper, however I felt that this article should cover the political entity rather then the city proper. Feedback anyone? | This is very much a work in progress right now. Clearly this is a very broad topic and I hardly know where to begin. As such I have been working on the bibliography mainly. I also think 'Ancient Rome' is very ambiguous. When I hear that I think of the city proper, however I felt that this article should cover the political entity rather then the city proper. Feedback anyone? | ||
::very good start-- I added some books. Yes, it's the larger Rome that needs coverage first, I think. [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 06:06, 20 December 2007 (CST) | |||
Latest revision as of 07:06, 20 December 2007
This is very much a work in progress right now. Clearly this is a very broad topic and I hardly know where to begin. As such I have been working on the bibliography mainly. I also think 'Ancient Rome' is very ambiguous. When I hear that I think of the city proper, however I felt that this article should cover the political entity rather then the city proper. Feedback anyone?
- very good start-- I added some books. Yes, it's the larger Rome that needs coverage first, I think. Richard Jensen 06:06, 20 December 2007 (CST)