Disputatio Categoriae:Reges Aegypti

Re "contribuenda"

The problem here is that the rulers of Egypt before about 1200 a.C.n.—that is, for more than half the ultimate history of Aegyptus antiqua—weren't called pharaohs until nearly 2000 years after the known series of monarchs had begun. Perhaps the pharaones and reges could be collapsed into a single category based on monarcha. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 00:35, 4 Martii 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would have said there's no real need to use the word "pharaones" in these categories. To Greek and Latin writers they were basileis = reges, as indeed, from an international point of view, they were. In particular, to class the Ptolemies as "pharaones" would be, although quite true, POV, because they were rulers of a bicultural state. Rather than choose their title in one of those two cultures, we should benefit from our use of an international and neutral language and class them among "reges". Same with their predecessors, I think. Plenty of room in individual articles, and in the article "Pharao", to explain what this title meant. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:09, 4 Martii 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There being no other comments, I merged "Pharaones" into "Reges Aegypti". I would propose to move "Categoria:Pharaones domus Ptolemaicae Aegypti‎" to "Categoria:Reges Ptolemaici" for the reason given above. The categories for older dynasties e.g. "Pharaones domus tertiae Aegypti" seem fine to me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:12, 12 Martii 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I see that my last sentence appears to ignore what Iacobus says at the beginning: the earlier pharaohs were not called pharaohs until much later. I overlooked that point. So I have no objection to renaming those categories too if Iacobus or anyone else proposes a new name. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:32, 17 Martii 2018 (UTC)[reply]