This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rome, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of Rome and ancient Roman history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomeWikipedia:WikiProject RomeTemplate:WikiProject RomeRome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
How can something built in the 17th century be considered "ancient"? This article really comes across as a fluff piece for Italian tourism rather than something important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.195.243.36 (talk) 15:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply
In comparatively recent times (say, the 18th Century), the contemporary usages of ancient (meaning extending into the archaeological past) and antique (meaning dating from the early modern period), were reversed - as in I met a traveller from an antique land (antique here meaning ancient).
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Perhaps the paper referred to the Voynich manuscript: isn't this a spurious and sensational reference to the Voynich manuscript? Since we read The marquis had these symbols engraved on the five gates of the villa Palombara, and the symbols as we have them bear no resemblance whatsoever to the (so far undeciphered) symbols in the Voynich manuscript; but a strong resemblance to perfectly intelligible symbols from the alchemical tradition. What could possibly make someone think otherwise?
Nuttyskin (talk) 15:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
