Gaius Paulinus Maximus

Black pudding Cider Make your own minds up!!

Some of these courts were attributed to Sulla but how many and which one's ,we're unsure of. There were possibly even more courts such as Quaestio de adulteriis (adultery) and Quaestio de plagiis (enslavement of freedmen) but these we can neither be sure of.

It's ice hockey, to win the Stanley Cup means to be crowned as champions of the NHL .

I've just finished The Gracchi, Marius and Sulla by A.H. Beesley. It was quite an interesting book, there's not really that many mainstream books around about these guy's, especially Marius so for that alone it was worth buying. My only moan is that the author very rarely cites any of his sources nor does he include any notes in the back of the book, so you don't really know how much to take as truth (from the ancient sources) or how much is his own personal thoughts on the events. I've just started reading Caesars Women by Colleen McCullough, it's been in my bookcase for ages but of late I've been reading the more factual and educational books on Rome, so it's been gathering dust, but I've decided to give them a rest for a while and get back to some good old Roman fiction and there's non better than The Masters of Rome series, it's that well written and researched that you can almost take it as fact anyway.

There were at least nine of these permanent courts (Quaestiones Perpetuae) in Rome. 1. Quaestio de Majestatis - Treason court 2. Quaestio de vi - Violence court 3. Quaestio de sicarriis &c - Assassination court 4. Quaestio de venificiis - Poisoning court 5. Quaestio de parracidio - Parricide court 6. Quaestio de falso - forgery court 7. Quaestio de repetundis - Extortion court 8. Quaestio de pectulatus - Embezzlement court 9. Quaestio deambitus - Bribery court To preside in these courts there were six praetors but as there were more courts than praetors a senator called judex quaestionis was appointed annually where a president was wanting. The praetor or judex quaestionis presided over the judices in each court, and the judices returned a verdict by a majority of votes, sometimes given by ballot, sometimes openly. In choosing these judices this was the process. The whole number available was ,it is said, 300, divided into three deuriae. In any given case the praetor named the decuria from which the jurymen were to be taken, and then drew from the urn containing their names the number assigned by law for the case to be decided. Each side could then challenge a certain number, and fresh names were drawn from the urn in place of those challenged.

It's that time of year again and the play offs are under way but who do you thinks going to take the cup this year? My moneys on the Penguins, with Malkin and Crosby both playing well I think they're gonna be hard to beat. But the Redwings have had a great season too, with Datsyuk, Zetterburg and Lidstom they'll push them all the way.

I'm sorry NN but black pudding is just SO SO WRONG!!!!!! But cider certainly get's the thumbs up.

Why don't you try This book, it's a bit pricey but if you really need an answer to your question then this may go a long way in helping you out. HERE'S a good review of the book from Bryn Mawr Classical Reviews.

Thanks mikeal, I've just listened the current iTunes podcast "The Third Macedonian War" It was pretty interesting although I thought the narrator was a little bit on the dull side, but other than that it was good. It's currently on pod cast 26, is there anyway I can get them back dated back to the beginning?

HE was many miles from home - a Roman soldier posted to Manchester, perhaps feeling cold and lonely, longing for loved ones left behind. He was called Aelius Victor. And now after 2,000 years an altar he built to keep a promise to the goddesses he prayed to has been unearthed in the middle of the city. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/new...iers_gift_found This is less than an hours drive from where I live, if I get the time I might pop down and take a look.

Throughout the Principate soldiers were forbidden to be legally married while serving, though of course many had local girlfriends, common-law wives, and children. Upon discharge, a soldier's "marriage" was recognized as legal, and any children he had were recognized as legitimate and Roman citizens. This is not only a nice "perk", since illegitimate children of civilians generally could not become citizens, but it also made a growing recruiting pool for the legions. A steadily increasing number of recruits listed their place of origin as "in castris", "in the camp", meaning their fathers had been soldiers (not necessarily that they had actually been born and raised in a military fortress!).

The Trajan Column, one of Rome's most famous monuments, will be shown next year under a totally new light. Italian researchers announced they plan to restore the column's original bright colors by "painting" it with light beams. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/04/10/trajan-column.html

Livia Ocellina This is from Suetonius..... The emperor Servius Galba was born in the consulship of Marcus Valerius Messala and Gnaeus Lentulus, on the ninth day before the Kalends of January, in a country house situated on a hill near Tarracina, on the left as you go towards Fundi. Adopted by his stepmother Livia, he took her name and the surname Ocella, and also changed his forename; for he used Lucius, instead of Servius, from that time until he became emperor. I'm not sure whether she did actually legally adopt him though because a woman in classical law was not allowed to adopt during her life time so she was just probably responsible for raising him. On the other hand, according to Roman emperors.org It says that Galba was indeed adopted in his youth by Livia (Drussila) the mother of Tiberius, and owed much of his early advancement to her. I think this must be wrong though, I'd prefer to trust the ancient sources first.

Nice one G-Man. A few too many bottles of those and you'll certainly feel like your heads been chopped off and nailed to the rostra I'm sure!

Plutarch states that Galba was somehow related to Livia, but nowhere does he mention the sum of 50,000,000 sesterces..... That Sulpicius Galba was the richest private person who ever came to the imperial throne, is generally admitted; moreover, his connection with the noble house of the Servii gave him great prestige, although he prided himself more on his relationship to Catulus, who was the foremost man in his time in virtue and reputation, even if he gladly left to others the exercise of greater power. Galba was also somehow related to Livia, the wife of Augustus Caesar, and therefore, at the instance of Livia, he was made consul by the emperor. Plutarch- Life of Galba Where as Suetonius does mention the amount but he says that Galba recieved nowhere near the stated amount...... He showed marked respect to Livia Augusta, to whose favour he owed great influence during her lifetime and by whose last will he almost became a rich man; for he had the largest bequest among her legatees, one of fifty million sesterces. But because the sum was designated in figures and not written out in words, Tiberius, who was her heir, reduced the bequest to five hundred thousand, and Galba never received even that amount. Suetonius- Galba

A bottle of Stella Artois and a bag of mixed nuts and raisins.....Now that's my idea of top snacking!

I own most of Manfredi's books and apart from the Alexander trilogy (which btw are fantastic) The Last Legion is probably my favorite, which is probably one of the reasons why I haven't seen the film yet. I know it's going to fall way short of my expectations and leave my all disappointed and wishing I hadn't bothered. Plus the slagging off it got in a previous thread doesn't fill me full of hope either!

A fragment of an ancient Roman equestrian statue that once adorned the Colosseum has been found during excavations near the world famous Italian landmark. According to the Italian daily, Il Messaggero, the fragment was discovered among the remains of an ancient pavement that once surrounded the amphitheatre........ http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Cultu...=1.0.2056023971

Damn sorry to that mate, I have two young daughters myself and the thought of not seeing them everyday is totally heart breaking, so I really feel for you . Sorry but I don't have any advice that's going to cheer you up, I'm sure your kids know full well that this decision is out of your hands and that you love them with all your heart. Keep your chin up mate.

Nephele, I bow my head to your superior statistical knowledge, after a quick re-count it appears that my numbers were slightly out, I missed a few Gaius's here and there! But never mind, I still thoroughly enjoyed doing it. (but I won't give up my day job!!! ) More of the same please Neph

AMEN SISTER!!!!! Jake: The band... the band... Reverend Cleophus James: DO YOU SEE THE LIGHT? Jake: THE BAND! Reverend Cleophus James: DO YOU SEE THE LIGHT? Elwood: What light? Reverend Cleophus James: HAVE YOU SEEEEN THE LIGHT? Jake: YES! YES! JESUS H. TAP-DANCING CHRIST... I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT!

I just love it when you provide us with these list's Neph, I find the whole Nomina et gentes thing fascinating, combine that with the whole statistical thing which I also love and you're definitely on to a winner with me. From the statistical survey you presented I've compiled a top five of the most popular praenomina throughout the major gentes of the Republic. 1. Lucius (352) 2. Marcus (273) 3. Gaius (255) 4. Publius (175) 5. Quintus (151) The top five gens providing the most Praenomina. 1. Cornelius (178) 2. Claudius (78) 3. Valerius (73) 4. Fabius (67) 5. Licinius/Manilus (56) Of the 48 gens there was 26 praenomina with a total of 1684 members. The top five praenomina alone accounted for 1206 members.

Basically every client had a patron who he would go to for favours and in return for this he would be indebted to the patron. The patron would take on the role of guardian and protector for his client and help out in all manners such as family matters, helping out to further his career, he'd defend him in court if necessary etc. And for this service the client would be forever indebted to the patron and could be called upon to provide a service or help out his patron in some way or another. The more clients possessed by a patron the higher his status would be, some patrons even had entire foreign cities as his clients, having these kind of distinctions would not only make them very rich but would also make them a serious force in Rome.

This goes some way to answering your question...... Johnstons Private life of the Romans.... http://' target="_blank">68. Iūstae Nūptiae. There were certain conditions that had to be satisfied before a legal marriage could be contracted even by citizens. The requirements were as follows: (1) The consent of both parties should be given, or that of the pater familiās if one or both were in patriā potestāte. Under Augustus it was provided that the pater familiās should not withhold his consent unless he could show valid reasons for doing so. (2) Both of the parties should be pūberēs; there could be no marriage between children. Although no precise age was fixed by law, it is probable that fourteen and twelve were the lowest limit for the man and the woman respectively. (3) Both man and woman should be unmarried. Polygamy was never sanctioned at Rome. (4) The parties should not be nearly related. The restrictions in this direction were fixed by public opinion rather than by law and varied greatly at different times, becoming gradually less severe. In general it may be said that marriage was absolutely forbidden between ascendants and descendants, between other cognates within the sixth (later the fourth) degree, and between the nearer adfīnēs . If the parties could satisfy these conditions, they might be legally married, but distinctions were still made that affected the civil status of the children, although no doubt was cast upon their legitimacy or upon the moral character of their parents. 69. If the conditions named in were fulfilled and the husband and wife were both Roman citizens, their marriage was called iūstae nūptiae, which we may translate by "regular marriage." The children of such a marriage were iūstī līberī and were by birth cīvēs optimō iūre, "possessed of all civil rights." If one of the parties was a Roman citizen and the other a member of a community having the iūs cōnūbiī but not full Roman cīvitās, the marriage was still called iūstae nūptiae, but the children took the civil standing of the father. This means that, if the father was a citizen and the mother a foreigner, the children were citizens, but, if the father was a foreigner and the mother a citizen, the children were foreigners (peregrīnī), as was their father. But if either of the parties was without the iūs cōnūbiī, the marriage, though still legal, was called iniūstae nūptiae or iniūstum mātrimōnium, "an irregular marriage," and the children, though legitimate, took the civil position of the parent of lower degree. We seem to have something analogous to this today in the loss of social standing which usually follows the marriage of one person with another of distinctly inferior position.

Id like to meet up with Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa and ask him about his life and what it was like to live as Augustus' second in command. Id ask him just how big a role he really played in transforming the republic into the principate and was Augustus really all he's been made out to be? I'd also like to know what he made of Livia, was she really a wicked poisonous woman like she's been made out to be or was she a perfect example of a Roman matron?