The worlds within

Supports Traditional 551–479 BCE dates and limitations of biographical and layered Analects material.

Source relationship Scholarly comparison of early texts, still dependent on later compilations.

Supports Reciprocal responsibility, cultivation and education in the later Confucian tradition.

Source relationship A separately edited university teaching synthesis focused on later social thought, not independent verification of individual sayings.

Supports Activity around 450 BCE, differing death chronologies, and late, varied textual transmission.

Source relationship Philosophical comparison of transmitted texts, explicitly agnostic on supernatural claims.

Supports Relationship of teaching traditions to later Buddha images, stupas and regional artistic transmission.

Source relationship An art historian combines later objects and narratives; objects independently support reception, not birth miracles.

Supports The 399 trial, charges and the Socratic problem arising from Plato, Xenophon and other sources.

Source relationship Scholarly comparison of multiple authors, distinguishing literary portrayals from a court transcript.

Supports Plato’s defence opening, earlier accusations and narrative of questioning knowledge.

Source relationship Ancient literary defence in modern translation; SEP also uses this text, so it is not a second independent transcript.

Supports Differences between Matthew and Luke, Nazareth background and historical questions about Bethlehem.

Source relationship Historical teaching compares the two gospels, not an external birth register.

Supports Later composite Nativity imagery and fourth-century festival evidence, including December 25 and January 6 traditions.

Source relationship Different authors use later art and liturgical evidence, independently supporting reception rather than the birth itself.

Supports Early writers’ varying late-BCE calculations and the inability to fix a secure year, month or day.

Source relationship Another scholarly analysis of early texts and chronology, still dependent on gospel material and later calculations.

Supports The 325 council, imperial context, doctrinal disputes and varying ancient attendance counts.

Source relationship Historical encyclopedia based on church texts; used for scope, not its older confessional judgments.

Supports The 325 creed’s consubstantial formulation and rules on appointments and review.

Source relationship Translated ecclesiastical documents in a religious archive; shares conciliar tradition with the encyclopedia, not an independent voting record.

Supports The 622 migration from Mecca to Yathrib and the Medinan community context.

Source relationship Museum synthesis of Islamic historical tradition, illustrated with later objects rather than eyewitness evidence.

Supports Migration, persecution and protection context, and 622 as the Islamic epoch.

Source relationship Independently edited education entry but the same transmitted migration tradition, not an independent travel archive.

Supports Edict XIII on Kalinga, remorse, victims and retained punitive authority.

Source relationship Teaching excerpt of Nikam and McKeon’s translation, sharing the same edict as the other source.

Supports A second translation’s remorse after conquest and instructions to successors.

Source relationship Excerpt from Vincent Smith’s translation; a different translation is not a second independent witness to the war.

Supports Abbasid translators’ multilingual skills, expertise, family collaboration and patronage.

Source relationship British Library curator synthesizes manuscript and research evidence, partly sharing scholarship with SEP without being a reprint.

Supports Syriac antecedents, eighth-century Abbasid translation and intergenerational intellectual assimilation.

Source relationship Different scholarship compares textual transmission and disputed attribution, adding independent analysis within partly shared manuscript chains.

Supports Theses as an academic dispute over indulgences, a letter to superiors and later authority conflict.

Source relationship Museum-library synthesis accepts posting but distinguishes heroic imagery; shares the 1517 documentary background with JHU.

Supports The 1517 theses, letter date and research debating the evidence for posting.

Source relationship Separately edited scholarly-journal timeline explicitly notes the posting dispute; the same letter and theses remain core evidence.

Supports Production in 1454–1455, 1455 letter and notarial evidence, and hand finishing.

Source relationship Collection research compares objects and documents; the companion page shares the same collection context.

Supports Mainz production, Latin text, metal type and hand decoration.

Source relationship An older exhibition account from the same library, not a second independent dating chain.

Supports Mainz production around 1455, replacement leaf and leather index tabs in Keio’s paper first volume, and hand decoration after printing.

Source relationship A different institution’s physical copy adds evidence of finishing; the date still rests on shared historical scholarship, not independent dating.