Ursus

I'm bumping this thread back up. The title has finally been released in the US, and many of our American members have finally had a chance to read it. My own copy is en route as we speak! So, any more thoughts or comments?

Actually, if one wants to debate Monarchy versus Republicanism outside of specifically Roman context, that would best be done in the Arena.

I have the _Chronicle of the Roman Emperors_ which PP mentioned. It's is a nice summary of the emperors. However, I believe the best way to learn about historical figures are to buy separate biographies on them written by the "experts" in the field. I just read an excellent treatment of Aurelian which offered more insights than some little snippet in a compendium could offer.

There was a thread about this in the religion folder. Let me see if I can find it and merge the topics. Edit: done!

Fascinating discussion, my UK friends. Do let us know how the Julius Caesar episode plays out. If they ruin JC, I won't consider buying the DVD.

*bump* Does this help you for your project, FC?

This is all interesting, fellows. And this is the one forum on the site that can be legitimately called a debate club. But let's all remember the focus of this site, at the end of the day, is Rome. I wish people would invest as much energy into producing articles and reviews on Romanophile topics as they do hashing out these contemporary socio-economic concerns. I think G.O. had the right idea when he suggested to all back away while you still could.

Hey, that's cool. Thanks.

Customers suck. Co-workers suck. Woe that we weren't born rich.

Can you do my Goth name, please? "eeeryajmrb" or "rjmamsajreebeey" for a male.

All too true. And the higher one gets on the socio-economic scale, the more pronounced that particular attitude. But hey, we're all Romans here, and we realize love and marriage are not synonymous, right?

Ambrosiana is beautiful! If I ever have a daughter, I now have a name in mind.

"Cato looks older than Caesar" is an understatement. He looked like he had one foot in the grave from a massive stroke.

Greetings, Augusta. Welcome to our growing forum. You'll find plenty of people here interested in the late Republic, and a few interested in the Principate. The Principate was my first love, and still is in some ways, if you can't tell by my avatar. I even like your quote from Virgil. :-)

Ave Pertinax! A nice sampling.

I've tuned out TV and Radio information a long time ago. :-)

Society is getting more open about this all all the time. I don't have any good advice on how to deal with the parents, unfortunately. But you should have a lot of breathing room if and when you run off to college. You are fortunate to have accepted this about yourself at your young age. I can't say I struggled with my sexuality, but I denied parts of my self for a long time - and the longer you deny them, the more they bite back.

Gratias. Strange, I've never felt particularly martial or British. I suppose I shall march for five miles and then settle down to tea and crumpets.

Look at the Roman Humanities folder. if you can't find any topics, start your own. :-)

Some (myself not included, of course), might think that your Mother :angel: got it right. Ye and verily, O’ wayward children of American pop culture. Repent thy folly or thou shalt suffer eternal wrath. Turn now my children to the Conan The Barbarian DVD, chapter 12. And Lo! Conan ascended the platform whereupon stood Thulsa Doom. And Thulsa Doom sayeth onto Conan: “My child! You have come to me, my son. For who now is your father if it is not me? Who gave you the will to live? I am the wellspring from which you flow. When I am gone, you will have never been. What would your world be without me ..my son? Son!" And then did Conan take out his sword, and lob off Thulsa Doom’s head. Let that be a lesson, my children. Having a big sword means more than all the bull**** in the world. Here endeth the lesson. Let those who have ears hear.

Symbols mean different things to different people. For instance, the swastika was a symbol in many ancient cultures that stood for the sun and/or good luck, long before it was ever appropriated by the occult-obsessed Nazi party. I've always had an interest in the Roman salute. I too am very curious if there is any textual or iconic evidence it was used. If not, perhaps it is something that simply survived in folk memory. But the Roman salute, if it allegedly existed, was supposed to be a lot less ... mechanical ... than the Prussian-ized salute used by the Nazis. I've heard in Germany it is illegal to give the stiff arm salute, which I find ridiculous. Again, symbols mean different things to different people. Even if it was invented by neo-classical admirers of Rome rather than Romans themselves, it still means what it means to modern day Romanophiles, a meaning that has no reference to Nazism.

Gee, I hate to resurrect this thread ... but as I sit here bored to tears by the 2006 Senatorial and House elections, I have to say I've become disenchanted with the American political process, or at least the two-party system which the logic of the American political process has infomally erected. I think I'd rather have what is known in some European countries as proportional party representation - which is that everyone votes for a party, and the party receives a percentage of seats in parliament equal to its votes. It seems to me like the most democratic means of balancing competing interest groups. It also allows more than two major parties (with the caveat that, to prevent extremist groups, usually there is some qualification that a party has to receive 3-5% of the vote to get any seats...). More interesting than running one slightly-left-of-center candidate against one slighty-right-of-center candidate and listening to the same tired slogans incessantly. So in conclusion, here is one American who doesn't believe we have the best system. Although certainly it's most preferable to dictatorships, theocracies, and banana republics.

The civil heads of a province in the later empire were usually termed "praeses" and the governor-generals of the diocese were the "vicarius." In some very troubled provinces where it wouldn't do to separate civil and military command, the civil and military command was still invested in one official. A dux could be governor under those rare circumstances. I'm not sure if Egypt was one of those trouble spots, though.

Comes (plural: comites). Literally means "companion" but for some reason translated as Count. In the Principate, the high raking members of the Imperator's retinue who travelled abroad with him were termed "companions." Later, Diocletian applied the term to his senior cavalry unit. Constantine gave it the final form - a title bestowed in 3 grades to members of his imperial court. Most of these offices were marks of personal favor applied to petty sycophants and couriers. However, some Counts actually had posts with real power in both the civil and military apparatus. In the civil service, Counts were usually in charge of finances. In the military, Counts could lead small detachments of the mobile field army. The Vicarius (governor-general) of the prestigious Eastern (Oriens) diocese was also a Count. Dux (plural: duces). Meaning "leader" but usually translated into English as "Duke." In the Republic, a term applied to commanding generals. In the empire it came to mean someone who commanded a detachment of troops, and was often used for allied barbarian leaders. Under Diocletian the military and civil powers of most provinces were separated. The governor retained civil powers, but the military powers were now headed by a dux. In military terms, a Count led a small detachment of the mobile field army. A Duke was the commander of the stationary garrison in frontier provinces. I've read conflicting reports about who outranked whom, but most of the latest scholarship seems to suggest a Count outranked a Duke. Both of course were under the authority of a Magister Militum (Master of Soldiers).

*bump*