Disputatio:Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica

Identity

I added interwiki links on the assumption that this person is the first cousin of Scipio Africanus (as is said in the first line). However, according to en:wiki, that Scipio Nasica was never censor. Maybe the abbé Lhomond slipped up here, or maybe I did? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:46, 6 Februarii 2008 (UTC)

It looks to me like this Scipio is the son of that one -- Scipio Corculum, first cousin once removed of Africanus. If so, then this article should be merged into the existing one about him, Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Corculum. I don't find any other Cornelius Scipio in the New Pauly who was censor in the right time frame. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:43, 3 Iunii 2021 (UTC)

So apparently there exists two alternative prints of this passage of Lhomond. The other one starts the third paragraph with eiusdem filius, which would solve everything: the first two paragraphs are about Publius Cornelius Cn.f. Scipio Nasica, the third one is about Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Corculum. @Amahoney: I will try to dispatch the text to their correct page and then transform this one in an disambiguation page. --Jahl de Vautban (disputatio) 08:39, 15 Octobris 2022 (UTC)