Primus Pilus

My apologies PNS In any case, I am more inclined to agree with Cicero (a contemporary of the events at hand), Paterculus who was 1 generation removed, Appian, Suetonius and Cassius Dio who concur, than Plutarch, who stands alone and doesn't list his reasoning for the alternative chronology. As always though, Plutarch's version has a certain flow to it that makes it seem believable.

I can't access Cicero save in Latin and my Latin is sub-nominal at best. For contextual purposes... Cic. Phil 13.15

Only ex-consuls were eligible to be elected dictator, so all dictators were already senators to start with. Also, the dictators I cited span well into the middle Republic, though thankfully the office had a bit of dust on it prior to Sulla. An interesting aside... since members of the senate were required to convene on specific days, or else be subject to fines, it would seem that all those who truly 'retired to private life' did so in actual practice and not just in theory. Therefore, it would seem that Cincinnatus was not actually a senator at the time of his recall, though he was still obviously an ex-magistrate.

Seemingly not. It's a good part of the reason that most think of the story as a reflection on the state of Roman aristocratic morals at the time that Livy and Dionysius were writing. They were contemporaries in the late Republic/early principate. Dionysius says the following after relating how Cincinnatus was approached while sowing his fields in Antiquities 10.17.6

No. It is not the gold stater shown nor the silver coin with Vercingetorix's famous profile. My apologies, but without a picture it's beyond my ability to identify. You may want to try the folks at Forum Ancient Coins

My wife and I love many seemingly unknown comedians who appear on shows like Comedy Central's "Live at Gotham". Unfortunately we never seem to remember their names. In any case, I thought the Louis C.K. HBO special (Shameless) was hilarious. I also very much enjoyed Lewis Black's most recent HBO special (Red, White, and Screwed) as well, despite generally disagreeing with his politics. A good comedian should be able to make you laugh at yourself even when you feel strongly about something.

And unfortunately, I can't personally read Greek (the language that Plutarch was originally published in) so I have no idea what the English Ilia was actually translated from.

Nobody knows who she was. The source for Ilia is Plutarch. He says virtually nothing about her. Life of Sulla 6.11. Arthur Keaveney in "Sulla: The Last Republican" only offers speculation, but there is no concrete legitimacy to Ilia's origin.

I generally avoid birthday threads and similar, simply because I don't want to accidentally ignore some while posting in others, but I'll make an exception... Many people, from those who post and participate on a daily basis to the occasional passerby who "lurks" or asks a question or two, have helped make this discussion forum into a destination for those who are drawn to Rome. While that process was obviously in motion before Nephele's arrival, she has certainly been a major contributor from the start. More importantly though, she has truly been instrumental in molding this collection of many different people with related interests into an actual community. Cheers!

Presumably because of their enemy the Huns, who were moving west. I'm not aware of any droughts or related environmental concerns that forced them to migrate.

The Germanics... specifically the Goths. While the Germanic people were held at bay for the better part of 4 centuries, it was ultimately the Germanics who toppled Roman the Roman administrative and authoritative presence in the West. The Goths were among the first to successfully invade Roman borders (the Thervingi sacked Byzantium in 263) and maintain a presence in former Roman territory (the Greuthungi in Dacia even after their defeat at Naissus in 271). The Goths opened the door for later invasions of the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Huns, Vandals, etc. While there were clearly more dangerous foes through the history of Rome: Carthage, Macedonia, Antiochus of Syria, Mithridates, Parthia, Persia, etc., Rome either conquered, or recovered from defeats to each of these in one way or another. Ultimately, Germania Magna was never held for any significant period of time (despite the attempts of Augustus and Marcus Aurelius) and it was the Germanics that ended the western empire regardless of all the other factors involved in "the fall".

Labor strikes were definately a part of the Roman economy. We might even consider the secession of the Plebes from the city to be strikes. While these wouldn't be identified with the sort of labor strikes you might be referring to, they were still a cessation of work in order to enact political change. In any case, GA Danziger published an entire volume on the subject in 1819. While there may be some more recent material, you may be able to find a public domain copy of "Labor Unions And Strikes In Ancient Rome" conveniently published online.

Considering you've been here for a year, I don't think you qualify as new anymore. I think I'm missing something... you are 0? So last year you were -1? In any case, welcome anyway, regardless of how old you are or how long you've been here.

No, but Dolebella did attempt to cancel debts, to his own benefit. He became tribune presumably in order to do this, the wiki just seems to have this a bit jumbled. See the Rogatio Cornelia de Novis Tabellis (47 BC) here for the detail.

Salve Faustus... We are always pleased to welcome folks who can offer new and interesting perspectives on the ancient world. I'm also personally tickled anytime someone finds this forum, whether it be word of mouth or random internet search. I hope you (as well as all newcomers) not only feel welcome but brush aside any apprehension at joining right into the discussion at hand. Cheers, Chris

The Lex Maria was a Plebiscitum and was therefore ratified by the people. It was opposed by the senate, not rejected. (Per the post in the Legal Chronology thread.)

Looking closely, I think the Lex Maria Tabellaria of 119 BC was contested by the Senate and thus never enforced. (Plutarch, Parallel lives, Marius, Ch. IV, sec. II): "...whereupon Cotta the consul opposed him and persuaded the senate to contest the law, and to summon Marius before it to explain his procedure. The senate voted to do this..." Maybe this fact would merit a note on your list. Good eye, but I think you stopped reading a bit too soon The same passage, Plut. Mar. 4.3 continues: No question at all that the Senate opposed it, but like so many other laws, this was a plebiscitum. It's rare that any law was passed without opposition by somebody.

The only example I was able to find on the very extensive list by PP predting the lex Gabinia Tabellaria is the Lex Cornelia et Baebia de Ambitu of 181BC (573 AUC), which incapacitated those who were convicted of ambitus from being candidates for ten years. The Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities adds a couple more, the anonymous first one from 432 BC ( 322 AUC ) which anyone to whiten his toga when he appeared as a candidate, and the Lex Poetelia of 358 BC (396 AUC ) which forbade candi

I love the civilization series. Unfortunately the game is an experience well beyond the ancient world, but one could try a modification... The Ancient Mediterranean

Actually, there is alot of information already compiled. Surprisingly though, much of it is conflicting. It was much easier to use the primary's vs. the secondaries (though they were a necessity in many situations).

Specifically, ambitus dealt with election bribery and the canvassing of votes. While the notion that bribing someone or a group of people for their votes was understandably illegal, the idea of canvassing is a bit more interesting. Canvassing in the Roman sense dealt with the targeting of influential individuals in communities outside of Rome in order to manipulate the rural vote in one's favor. It may seem strange to our modern sensibilities that a candidate was not allowed to "campaign" in such a manner (at least on market days where large numbers of people were gathered), but new men and less desirable plebeian candidates had the advantage in this situation and it was thusly discouraged. The William Smith entry on Ambitus

I seem to have -3 myself... must be a bug that's worked itself into the system.

Be aware that the early history of the Republic is quite steeped in legend or terribly sketchy detail. According to Livy, Poplicola (or Publicola) was consul 4 times, each with a colleague (the first time he was sole suffect consul after Brutus and Collatinus. Collatinus was expelled much like his kinsmen King Tarquin and Brutus died). However, its quite probable that the constitution had not been quite flushed out yet, and Poplicola may have actually been a sort of intermediary after the expulsion of Tarquin. He was one of several of the early consuls who have may have held power and authority that wasn't much different than the King he helped expel. There are any number of possible scenarios when trying to identify the details. Horatius Cocles was a heroic commander who supposedly defended the Sublician bridge from the Etruscans. As far as I can discern, he was never consul. Coriolanus was likely an aristocrat and general who seemingly commanded a private army. He too was never really consul, but seems to be one of these early men of influence in the 'revolution'. Essentially, after failing to exert his own authority (especially over the Plebes) he led an army of the Volscii against Rome (plebeian interests anyway). Again, the key here is that much of the early stories of Livy and Plutarch are legendary. There are certainly elements of any legend that are based on truth, but much of these early stories we must take with the proverbial "grain of salt". Some of these men may have been "kingly" in their own right after the expulsion of Tarquin, as it took a considerable length of time to determine the constitutional authority. (if the king was expelled in 510 and the tribunis plebis was established in 494, then it was at least 16 years of rather uncertain government with many possibilities)

Information seems to be slowly spreading... Scott Rubin I' Claudius via google Seems DiCaprio is set to sign on. I'm torn on him. I've liked him in a couple of fims (Departed, Gangs of New York) but still have trouble dealing with the fact that it's Leonardo DiCaprio that I'm watching.