Primus Pilus

Also just finished watching 28 weeks later... not quite as good as the original, but still well done if you like the post-apocalyptic/horror/thriller genre.

I watched Rocky Balboa (Rocky VI I think). Hahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahha. That's all I have to say about that.

Yes. So what? There was also an age qualification, a sex qualification, and a nationality qualification. But if keeping 3-year-old Egyptian girls out of the senate constitutes an oligarchy, the term has no meaning. Oligarchy is "rule by the few"--an inspection of the massive two-volume Magistrates of the Roman Republic should surely convince anyone that Rome was not ruled by "the few" (even if they were overwhelmingly Roman males with enough money to buy a couple horses and old enough to ride one.) Additionally, since there were also such qualifications for the equestrian class, a much larger and extensive group than that of the senate, the restriction for the senators doesn't necessarily set them apart from the entirety of Roman society. While the equestrians may not have been a legislative or governing body, their financial influence and impact on the courts, etc., also provide support for a much wider governing base than a strict oligarchy provides. Unquestionably, the Roman senate were the elite of the elite, but executive magisterial power was dependent upon public election and the influence of the Tribunis Plebis should not be ignored as a potential counter to consolidated elite class power. While the tribune may have been sometimes used to secure that very power, it's mere existence as a direct and powerful representation of the will of the masses disproves the Roman senate as a true oligarchic state.

Don't confuse government which should be the citizens protection against predatory and outright fraudulent practices of corporations. As flawed as they are today we seem to forget the reason the FDA, USDA and similar government agencies exist( hint sinclair lewis). If they become controlled by the very interests they were created to regulate then there is a problem (and there is a problem). Sawdust in your milk? maggots in your beef ? Trichinosis in your pork? don't see that much anymore. I think some peoples ire is misdirected . If a company could sell you a drink with an ingredient that would kill you in 29 years and get away with it they would. We need more and non political regulation not less. .If you want to sit on your porch with a 4-10 loaded with lead be my guest, just let me fish through on your creek please. I didn't confuse anything. I said "government" and I meant "government". Simply because some government controlled bureaucratic agencies do serve some practical purposes does not mean these are not more methods to control it's citizenry. Such agencies also approve chemical ingredients which were hardly ever meant for consumer consumption. Again, I am not suggesting the lack of practical value to the citizenry, but banning butter while approving chemically produced margarines and other alternatives does not leave me with the impression of an agency truly looking out for my best interests.

Nobility? Oligarchy? Aristocrats? Are we talking about the Roman republic or about 18th C. France? The Roman term nobiles translates as "the known": the nobiles were 'known' because their families were consistently ELECTED to magistracies by the public. Far from being an oligarchy, the nobiles failed to have even a majority of seats in the senate in Sulla's day, and Sulla himself opened up the senate to hundreds of New Men. Given the openness of the Roman republic to new men and its reliance on the votes of its citizens, the Roman republic was very different from the hereditary aristocracy of feudal Europe. Magistracies were not landed titles--they were one-year elected appointments. In defense of those who use the term oligarchy... it's not as if there was a defined election based turnover within the Senate throughout the Republic. While Senatorial membership was not necessarily limited to a defined pool of individuals, change in membership was a relatively slow process. Sulla's massive turnover was a direct result of his purge of the existing body. Without it, hundreds of new men would not have been enrolled... at least not in that single fell swoop.

I'm just hoping the Stars are tired after what turned out to be a grueling series with SJ. Go team Sweden! er, I mean Detroit.

Of course, bribery was a common practice of the Roman political system... even if it was illegal. One shouldn't be surprised that politicians in any era are susceptible to such things. Because those who did lacked legal/moral political scruples, were in need of money, emphasized with Jugurtha's position, or wanted to hurt political adversaries who stood to gain from a reduction in Jugurtha's power. Additionally, for those less concerned with politics and were motivated simply by greed, Jugurtha's money was as good as anyone else's. What book? Fiction often has similarities to, or is a direct reflection of reality. History generally treats such conditions as shrewd calculation when it works out in the favor of the said general, and treats it as inability when it doesn't work out, but this would be a rather broad generality. Sometimes, protracting a war is not necessarily for personal gain, but rather for the gain of one's entire army and state. The Romans couldn't beat Hannibal in Italy, so Quintus Fabius Maximus fought a war of attrition against him rather than risk losing everything in a single battle. While he was politically vilified for it, history recognizes the wisdom of his strategy. In any case, there was great political motivation behind the support for and/or opposition to Metellus' command in Africa. The accusation of protracting the war came from none other than Marius and his supporters. Not surprisingly, Marius wanted the command for himself. The accusation itself is too personally motivated to trust it.

This ties into what I was attempting to say in my first response. Grant helped popularize the study of ancient history and distribute it to people other than what we might consider scholars and students. He is not solely responsible for the popularization of ancient history by any stretch, but Grant was a leader (whether intentioned or not) in making such history accessible to the general public. Being unattached to a single university was actually the key. It was ultimately responsible for allowing him the freedom to choose subject matter, style, audience, etc. He unquestionably still would have been a fine writer had circumstances been different, but we are left only with the what if.... would he have been as prolific or as widely popular had he been beholden to a single academic institution?

in the late republic... a cohort could possibly number more than 11 centuriae, but not called by number. althought cohort was numbered 1 to 10 in the main body of the legion. centuria was called by name- title, function and position. 1 1-centuria of hastatus prior 2 1-centuria of hastatus posterior 3 1-centuria of princeps prior 4 1-centuria of princeps posterior 5 1-centuria of triarii prior 6 1-centuria of triarii posterior ________________________________ 7 1-centuria signiferi 8 1-centuria of hastatus antepilanus 9 1-centuria of princeps antepilanus 10 1-centuria of triarii antepilanus 11 1-centuria of cursores... light infantry naturally number more than one centuriae in a cohors.. but base on this presentation, a cohort could number more than 6 centuriae, and possibly 11. Again, where is this information coming from? The honorific titles of Hastatus, Princeps, Triarii, etc. still existed but the late Republican and imperial legions were uniform cohorts. The days of the separately equipped Hastatus, Principes and Triarii had passed. In any case, there is some understandable confusion over the transitional period between Maniple and Cohort and between the early Republican, Polybian and Post Marian/Imperial legions... If you have some interesting information to share, I for one, would love to see the source material.

Aside from all the disassociation between modern armies and the legion in this thread, despite the practical value such association can have for simple illustrative purposes, I'm left a bit perplexed as to what the point is. Getting back to the original post of the thread... What is the time frame being presented here. The annual "levy" process of the legion evolved as much as the structure and tactical function of the legion itself did over time. What is the source material for the above? Considering the emphasis on Patrician families, I presume you are talking about the earliest legions... perhaps even the tribal phalanx? I've delayed replying directly because I've been trying to find the appropriate source material. I've not had luck in Livy's description of the early legion (in book 8) nor in his earlier books describing the foundation of the Republic. I've also had no luck in Dionysius but I'll admit to only a relatively light perusal. It's definately prior to Polybius, who describes the legionary formation of the middle Republic or Punic War era in his Histories Book 6. Rather than continue down this path, can you provide some background to help me out?

Aside from the "lusting after white women" thing which I have not heard from anyone, is there anything that you know to be incorrect from the characterization? While he does not seem to be a fundamentalist Muslim, I am concerned with his stance on his own country. In any case, this is the problem itself. Obama is undefined because of his own rather nebulous campaign strategy. His inability to state and stand behind clear positions rather than maintain his candidacy based on charisma and the so-called "hope for change" has allowed more polished politicians (and/or political machines) to define him. He's been the leading Democratic candidate for several months, and I honestly still don't know what he truly stands for.

The entire history of the Republic is illustrated with such examples. The struggle of the orders that lasted from the founding of the Republic through the early 3rd century BC was ripe with political strife. The Legal and Institutional Chronology provides a good starting point.

11 Obamadollars

The gate, found complete with 11 meters of wall, was a goods-delivery entrance to the Roman town from its river port outside on the Rhine. A town gate that was probably built with a grant from Roman Emperor Nero has been discovered in Cologne, Germany during work on a new underground train line, archaeologists said. "This is finest Roman handiwork," said Hansgerd Hellenkemper, director of the Roman museum in the city... Expatica

History

No contract... but yes, it is the rate for 1 year. After that I assume the cost will quadruple.

Yeah but but all Americans make $10,000,000 per year... I thought everyone knew that. Prices in Europe are unquestionably less expensive and always have been. I suspect it has something to do with differences in economic ideology and government intervention (at least in some areas), but I wouldn't know that definitively. Well that, and the fact that our utility services always have and always will gouge us mercilessly. Anyway, I called Comcast and told them I was thinking about leaving. They offered me the best package they had... every movie channel and the sports package, along with the 16 mbps internet service for roughly the same price that I was paying before. I don't really know why I'm getting all of this, because we really don't watch very much television...

Indeed, if one browses the aforementioned Smith's entries, the list of non Caesar, Iulus, Libo and Mento Julii is actually quite long. Even before Caracalla, the number of Gallic Julii seems to have been rather large.

He got his head handed to him by Ptolemy.

A good place to start is the Smith Dictionary of Greek and Roman biographies... The Julia gens had four main branches including Caesar, Iulus, Libo and Mento. Iulus (early Republic) and Caesar (later Republic) were by far the most prominent.

Alas, I was hoping you would. In any case, I've done some more research... the Uverse internet connection is not the same speed as comcast... it's only 1.5 mbps vs. the 6 that Comcast offers. Oh the dilemma

I currently have the Comcast "Triple-Play" package which includes Cable TV, VOIP Phone and Internet. My TV package is digital cable (no movie channels, since I just canceled HBO) with High Definition and a 2 channel record Motorola DVR (which also struggles to record in HD) with 80 GB. The digital package includes some 100+ channels, 30ish HD channels and some 50 music channels. So somewhere around 200 channels in total. Internet is 6 Mbps/384 Kbps connection. I'm paying roughly $170 per month. AT&T UVerse is new to the area and is also offering all three packages. While VOIP phone and internet service is roughly the same service, the television package includes 320+ channels (including all the movie packages) and a more advanced DVR with 4 tuner service (rather than dual with Comcast) and 120 GB space. The UVerse service will be about $150 per month, plus there is apparently some promotion where they will give me a $250 cash rebate to get connected. So I save $20 per month plus the $250 bonus. Seems like a no-brainer right? Well, I've had comcast for 12 years and my primary comcast email is the one I use for everything from bill pay notification to personal stuff. There's alot of stuff that runs through that email. I don't mind switching it, but if the UVerse service sucked, I would be terribly disappointed after giving up my comcast mail. (and no, there is no way to keep the Comcast mail by paying some nominal fee.. I must pay the $46 per month for the cable service... actually I think it's $56 if I don't have Comcast TV). Anyway, I've been looking around but can't find much info on the AT&T service. I hate them, much like all the bureaucratic crap utility companies, and it's not like Comcast is some great icon of customer service. I'm just curious if anyone has any personal experience or knows anything about UVerse? I have to make a decision within a couple of days.

Hence my reasoning for changing it on the forum headline. I was equally disgusted.

While I agree that there was a sort of disconnect from legion to legion (at least prior to the late Republic and early Principate), there was still some uniformity in rank, responsibility and command structure. I do think RW is trying too hard to fit modern structures and customs into their Roman counterparts, but I did just want to add this slight clarification for the casual passerby: A centurion was a centurion regardless of which legion he served. Each legion had up to 59 of them and each one carried their own rank and status. In theory, an individual Primus Pilus of Legion I would have held the same social status and authority as his counterpart in Legion II, but the two were not necessarily interchangeable the way that two different Colonel's would be in a modern army. In a modern army, a Colonel held that rank and authority to those below him regardless of his assignment, whereas in the Roman legion, each officer held that rank for soldiers within that legion. While a Centurion was a Centurion regardless of legion, a Centurion in Legio I had no command authority over legionaries in Legio II.

Michael Grant may not have been the most ground-breaking in terms of new information, but I personally found that his approach and style of presentation helped develop my own passion for ancient history. He may not have been the sort of historian that one equates with the likes of a Mommsen or a Syme, but Grant's work was respected by contemporaries while it also maintained a relatively unique appeal to the average/casual reader.