This is looking good so far. I'll have more comments soon. 

 --- //[[kwsherwood@gmail.com|admin]] 2021/06/16 15:26//
----

I have a few minor suggestions: The section you have in the commentary section may do better in the context section. Personally, I have been using the commentary section to add a more personal note about the piece (like how I interpreted it or something,) and the context section has been for the facts I have discovered throughout researching it. 

Also, when you give the translations of the poems for the second one, i would clarify the description you give. As the reader, it is confusing. You say things like "this praise song was third and final" but you then go on to list 4 other poems. So, I would just try to clarify that. 

Other than that, it looks great! Good job!
 --- //[[vdpcc@iup.edu|Mikenna]] 2021/06/16 15:35//

Hi Mikenna, thanks for the suggestion. I tried to reword the short description of praise poem 2 and clarified in the overview section that each of the praise poems included come from separate/distinct ceremonies or events. Does that seem a little less confusing? If not, please let me know and I'll try to restructure again. Thanks.

 --- //[[tbfx@iup.edu|Haley E. Brown]] 2021/06/16 16:05//


----

This is very well done, including lots of rich information. 

Two things might clarify. Somewhere -- note that Rothenberg has created "versions" which are not straight or literal translations, they are a bit "free." 

Second:  it looks like you went to the original source for the source languages AND literal translation. That's brilliant, very useful. But it's not 100% clear from the text that's what we're getting here -- and I think it adds value to make that a bit more clear!  Maybe an intro note saying, the following is from .... etc.

----

Is it noteworthy that Rothenberg's versions strip some of the name and historical specificity? 

 --- //[[kwsherwood@gmail.com|admin]] 2021/07/09 02:30//