I Have Written Off Wikipedia Completely

A Writer’s Journey

Up until about five minutes ago, I’ve been an avid supporter of Wikipedia. Obviously you can’t cite it as a source in your homework paper, but you can get a general overview on any topic you want. It’s always been the first place I go for information.

Not anymore.

I set a Google alert on “Vestal Virgins,” which sends me an email every time someone online mentions the Vestal Virgins. That way if there are any new pictures or information, I find out. It doesn’t seem to be working very well, though, because it never sends me links to my blog.

Today I followed a link that led me to the main Wikipedia page for the Vestal Virgins. I hadn’t been there for five years, so I looked it over. As I was skimming through, I read this paragraph that wasn’t there before: 

“At its peak the College of Vestals consisted of 18 girls and women, though only the senior-most 6 were termed Vestals and were full priestesses; the junior 12 were child-novices and maiden acolytes. During the Republic and Empire, 3 new novices would be chosen every five years upon the retirement of the 3 senior Vestals; these novices were almost always prepubescent girls.”

There were only six Vestal Virgins.

My mouth dropped open because one of two things had happened: either one, I was the worst researcher in the entire world and was wrong about there only being six, or two, that entire paragraph was false. 

While I don’t believe I’m the worst researcher in the world, it was enough of a possibility to make me panic for about five minutes. I skimmed through my books, looked up some sites, and whew! Everything says there were only six Vestal Virgins.

I found only two other websites that say the same thing about there being eighteen: here and here. Neither page cites any sources. T. Cato Worsfold, on the other hand, cited Plutarch and Dionysius saying there were only six.

You might think this isn’t a big deal. I might read the Wikipedia article and gain some false information, but then I’ll just read a book that’ll clarify things for me. No harm done, right?

The problem is I’ve noticed in my research that whenever I run across two pieces of information that contradict, I always favor the first thing I read. All the information I have builds a picture in my head, and I try to make the rest of the information fit – sometimes, without even thinking about it, this means tossing out valid material only because it’s unfamiliar.

I am a firm believer in being careful with the first place you research. Skimming the web is good at first because it sparks interest, but if you’re serious about a topic, I highly recommend turning the computer off and getting a good book as soon as possible.

Even then, you’re not safe. I’ve read some books on Marie Laveau that aren’t just wrong; some of their facts don’t make logical sense. (Yes, Tallant, I’m pointing a finger at you.)

When you start your research, I have three pieces of advice:

1. Be open.
2. Be suspicious.
3. Be thorough.

On A Writers Journey, aspiring novelist Teralyn Rose Pilgrim talks about the excitements and disappointments that go along with her budding career. Currently agents are looking at her historical fiction about Rome’s Vestal Virgins.
teralynpilgrimm.blogspot.com