Mosquito

What are you talking about?

I dont belive in this possibility. Altough im not an expert in parthian history but i belive that he would first look for someone or even some nation in the parthian empire which he could have support and next come with an army and conquer all, diving and ruling, winning on the battlefields and maybe even reaching India just like Alexander did. I know MPC that you dont like him but Ceasar wasnt Crassus.

Caligula definatelly had bad press. Many modern historians claim that he wasnt mad at all but in opposite - he was very consequent in everything what he was doing.

A bad day for Remus, but a great day for mankind! Iv just noticed that on the board it is still 20th april. But in this case Roman time is more important

This day in 753 BC Rome was founded. Happy birthday Rome and Romans!

XXX - please delete this topic

Here you go. Funny you bothered to cite how populare they were without ever having read them--even stranger for a person with your (self-described) background in Roman law. Leges Regiae - not the 12 Tables. I was expecting from you quotes of Leges Regiae. 12 tables i was quoting myself but you dont read. For the rest I will reply when I come back home.

Yes you did. I saved what you posted, but I'm not going to repeat it here. Both Pantagathus and Pertinax were absolutely right to delete it. (And you Mods may want to delete this, too, and that's okay with me. But justice demanded that I speak up.) -- Nephele I can only notice that your share in this debate is as fruitful as usually. My compliements.

I saw nothing offending in my post. I didnt attack MPC as the person, only conclusions he made. Its a difference. Now back to the topic. MPC - according to you history looked completelly different than it really was - here is what you suggest and somtimes even claim: Plebeians didnt demand to make codification of law. In your opinion it were patricians who wanted to make the code of Twelve Tables to worsen the situation of plebs. It wasnt an existing law gathered together in one act but - in your opinion - quite a new law made against the plebs and against its will. Claudius decemvir - the person who according to existing roman sources played main role in decemvirate was a patrician (thank you for that notice MPC - how strange that Claudius was patrician) but really he was against the plebs and cooperated together with his class to persecuate poor plebeians. The fact that he was main player of decemvirate (the body which become Roman goverment and in fact a dictatorship held together by 10 people) means for you that his role was minimal. Wow - so you know those laws. They exist and you can even quote them? Please go on! I belive that the fact that there are some "letters" doesnt mean at all that it are "laws". Considering the fact that we dont even know those laws it isint strange that: "none of these early laws even mention plebs". Not to mention the fact that in the early Rome plebs didnt even exist as social class. Under Etruscan rules were only two classes - patricians and their clients - like in the etruscan model. No, it was only influenced by Greek laws but its source was local Roman spoken law and traditions - in other words - mos maiorum itself. You really dont understand, dont you? In all the conflicts, law suits - the deciding role had patrician magistrates and priests (especially priests). The law belonged to category "divine" not to category "well known". The knowledge of law was reserved for patricians who were raping it, favouring its own clients, not to mention the fact that in the legal conflict between patrician and plebeian - the second had no chance because the law was used in completelly arbitraty ways. The fact that 12 Tables dont mention plebs is a great victory of plebs, it simply means that it is the one and only law for ALL THE ROMANS! It means that everyone can go and read it and learn it .... and know if he is right or not. The few exceptions didnt matter much and even mixed patrician/plebeian marriages were soon allowed.

Aye but you had to be creazy gladiator to kill 30 ppl. And you wouldnt have chance to kill that many in space of few hours but it would take years instead. So far Iv never seen a bad man with gun. If everyone can have a gun it means that idiots can have it as well.

Well, thanks God consitution of my country dont give the right to have weapon as personal freedom so I can go outside without need to consider if the people walking on the street are armed or not.

Damn! What did he use? Machine gun or handgrenades?

Not only great American writer but one of the world's greatest writers. What a loss!

Im a lawyer and got degree but on my university the studies of law were probably very different than in the countries of common law like USA or GB. It takes here 5 years (10 semseters) and it was always considered here that one cannot be a lawyer without knowing well history of law and everything what influenced the law trough centuries. So we started with the history of philosophy, history of political and legal doctrines, Roman Law (which was always one of the hardest exams), history of political systems - which included all political systems begining with ancient eastern despotic states and ending on modern times (we had to learn 3 French constitutions, US consitution not to mention all 7 Polish constitutions), history of court law (we had to learn basics of common law and the French CC, German BGB, Swiss ZBGB and some other). In fact 3 first semesters we were taught only history and the next 7 we learned this law which we use now. Usually the profesors who thaught us historic subjcets were the most demanding. Profesor of Roman law was even organising Roman law suits and we had to give speeches like Roman advocates. For sure it was good training before we started to learn modern civil or constitutional law.