Ingsoc

All adoptions would have to be approved by the head of the family (pater familia) as he had the legal power (poestas) over his children. It's wasn't anything to do with the origin of the adopter and the adoptee.

The treatment of former POW was all depend of the circumstance in which they were captured, for example the Senate refuse to buy the freedom of the Cannaeprisoners as they their surrender as disgrace and a sign of cowardnece beacause some of their comrades manage to escape and return to Rome (Titus Livius, 22.59-61).

Vespasian publicly proclaim as a pretender to the throne at July 11 "Tiberius Alexander, prefect of Egypt, was the first to compel his legions to take the oath for Vespasian on the Kalends of July, the day which was afterwards celebrated as that of his accession; then the army in Judaea swore allegiance to him personally on the fifth day before the Ides of July." (Suentonius, life of Vespasian, 6.3) Before that he even sent his son Titus to congratulate Galba on becoming the new emperor (Suentonius, Life of Titus, 5)

In 493, another L Junius Brutus was a tribune of the plebs (Dion. Hal.6.70.1-89.1; Plut. Cor. 7.1). Maybe the plebeian tyrannicide was actually descended from him? It's interesting that Atticus had another resolution to this. Or maybe either Titus or Tiberius had children of their own who at some point transfer to a plebian rank.

Yes, they would, and it needn't necessarily have been a step down, as there were plebeian families (such as the Livii) who were counted among Rome's aristocratic families. I think the whole view of the plebian with contempt by the patrician cease to exist during the middle republic, the earlist mention of a patriacian turn plebian that I found is of Gaius Servillius (Consul in 203 BC) "The consul C. Servilius had done nothing worth recording in Etruria, nor after his departure for Gaul. In the latter country he had rescued his father C. Servilius and also C. Lutatius after sixteen years of servitude, the result of their capture by the Boii at Tannetum. With his father on one side of him and Lutatius on the other he returned to Rome honoured more on personal than public grounds. A measure was proposed to the people relieving him from penalties for having illegally acted as tribune of the plebs and plebeian aedile while his father who had filled a curule chair was, unknown to him, still alive. When the bill of indemnity was passed he returned to his province." (Titus Livius, 30.19) Livius seem to be mistaken of his account, it's that Servillius crime was to be adopted into a plebian family (the Servii were patricians) without the agreement of his father who he thought was dead.

Happy B-Day AoS, now you can go and get drunk (legally I mean ).

The Praetorian Guards seemed to think so when they found Claudius cleaning the inside of the drapes. They'd just finished murdering off the Imperial family--making the quivering Claudius emperor was a great way to cover their backsides. Actually not all the praetorians were part of the murder plot, part of them keep there loyalty to Caligula and the Julio-Claudians. As for G-Manicus question, even if there was any male of proper age to become an emperor I doubt he would have manage to assume power as it was now the provincial legioneries and not the praetorians who crowned the emperor and they natuarlly supported their commander officer.

Yes, from the earliest account the affair between Servillia and Caesar was in 63 BC a long time after Brutus birth. Plutarchus also mention that Brutus resemble the statue of Lucius Junius Brutus.

We may assume (base on Cassius Dio, Book LXXIX, 1) that by the time on the Severan dynasty the reservations about marriage alliance with foreign rulers has dissapear.

From the Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World: "Marriage in the ancient world was a matter of personal law, and therefore a full Roman marriage could exist only if both parties were Roman citizens or had conubium (right to contract marriage), either by grant to a group (e.g. Latins) or individually. Only such a marriage could place the children in the father's power and create rights of succession. Further, parties might have this general conubium but still lack conubium with each other Impediments varied: (1) Age. Although consent, not consummation, made a marriage, the partners had to be physically capable. The minimum age became fixed at 12 for women and (apparently) 14, puberty, or both for men. (2) Relationship, by blood, adoption, or marriage, within certain degrees. (3) Disparate rank. The Augustan marriage laws of 18 BC and AD 9 prohibited marriage between senators (and their immediate descendants) and freed slaves. (4) Considerations of morals or public policy. Augustus similarly prohibited marriage between free‐born citizens and members of disreputable professions (see infamia), or with a convicted adulteress. Serving soldiers (below a certain rank) were forbidden to marry until Septimius Severus); later, to avoid undue influence, provincial officials were forbidden to marry women of the province during their term, and guardians (see guardianship, Rome ) to marry their wards."

I think that the great motives to form marriage alliance were political support inside the institutes of the republic, this foreign rulers couldn't provide. It's was also consider a disgrace and un-Roman to merry foreigners, just look at the great political damage and slander that Marcus Antonius suffered because he had merried Cleopatra VII.

Why do you think Centurions didn't retire after their term of service ended? Zvi Yavetz think that service in the Roman Army and achieving the rank of centurion was factor of social mobility and said (citing Syme, RR, 353-4 and Valerius Maximus, 6.8.7) that after their military service ex-centurions serve as high magistrate in the municipium, were elevated into the rank of eques and some even got into the senate.

As for secondery source there is a good biography called "Cato the Cencor" by A.E Astin.

That a very modern view you have on Julia, infact I don't think her life course was any diffrent from any other aristocratic woman, it's was usuall for a woman to merry young and ofen her husbands were much older then her. As for Augustus heirs, he actually had many (his nephew Marcellus, son in law Agrippa, grandsons-adopted sons Gaius and Lucius) they just all died before him so Tiberius were left the only worthy succesor.

This could be said for some modern armies as well, for example the German Army until the end of WWI had the most senior command positions reserved for the aristocrats while usually the plebs didn't manage to manage to rise above the lower officers ranks.

Did you mean "Ultor"? it's mean "Avenger", the title was first attached to Mars by Octavian after his victory over Brutus and Cassius at the battle of Philipi in 42 BC.

Read this intresting book review by Thomas Stevenson

Philipus V of Macedon, ruled during 221 BC to 179 BC

"L. Siccius Dentatus was presented with this crown but once, though he gained as many as fourteen civic crowns, and fought one hundred and twenty battles, in all of which he was victorious--so rarely is it that an army has to thank a single individual only for its preservation! Some generals, however, have been presented with more than one of these crowns, P. Decius Mus, the military tribune, for example, who received one from his own army, and another from the troops which he had rescued when surrounded. He testified by an act of devoutness in what high esteem he held such an honour as this, for, adorned with these insignia, he sacrificed a white ox to Mars, together with one hundred red oxen, which had been presented to him by the beleaguered troops as the recompense of his valour: it was this same Decius, who afterwards, when consul, with Imperiosus for his colleague, devoted his life to secure victory to his fellow-citizens. This crown was presented also by the senate and people of Rome a distinction than which I know of nothing in existence more glorious--to that same Fabius who restored the fortunes of Rome by avoiding a battle; not, however, on the occasion when he preserved the master of the horse6 and his army; for then it was deemed preferable by those who were indebted to him for their preservation to present him with a crown under a new title, that of "father." The crown of grass was, however, awarded to him, with that unanimity which I have mentioned, after Hannibal had been expelled from Italy; being the only crown, in fact, that has hitherto been placed upon the head of a citizen by the hands of the state itself, and, another remarkable distinction, the only one that has ever been conferred by the whole of Italy united. In addition to the persons already mentioned, the honour of this crown has been awarded to M. Calpurnius Flamma, then a military tribune in Sicily; but up to the present time it has been given to a single centurion only, Cneius Petreius Atinas, during the war with the Cimbri. This soldier, while acting as primipilus under Catulus, on finding all retreat for his legion cut off by the enemy, harangued the troops, and after slaying his tribune who hesitated to cut a way through the encampment of the enemy, brought away the legion in safety. I find it stated also by some authors, that, in addition to this honour, this same Petreius, clad in the pr

From a legal point of view the procedure in which Caligula came to power is unclear, Tiberius could name him and Gemellus as the joint heirs to his personal property however the position of princeps wasn't among them. In the past heirs to the throne were marked by the grant of Tribunic power, this was granted to Agrippa and Tiberius in Augustus time and to Germanicus and Drusus Minor in Tiberius reign. It's clear that neither Caligula nor Gemellus receive the tribunica power and the sources are unclear on what legal grounds Caligula came to power and demoted his cousin.

What is your source that "This joint reign of Gemellus and Caligula was nullified by Caligula based on the grounds that Gemellus insane"?

Actually we don't know on what grounds Caligula disinheritated his cousin.

Upon this the Tencteri, a tribe separated by the Rhine from the Colony, sent envoys with orders to make known their instructions to the Senate of the Agrippinenses. These orders the boldest spirit among the ambassadors thus expounded: "For your return into the unity of the German nation and name we give thanks to the Gods whom we worship in common and to Mars, the chief of our divinities, and we congratulate you that at length you will live as free men among the free. Up to this day have the Romans closed river and land and, in a way, the very air, that they may bar our converse and prevent our meetings, or, what is a still worse insult to men born to arms, may force us to assemble unarmed and all but stripped, watched by sentinels, and taxed for the privilege. But that our friendship and union may be established for ever, we require of you to strip your city of its walls, which are the bulwarks of slavery. Even savage animals, if you keep them in confinement, forget their natural courage. We require of you to massacre all Romans within your territory; liberty and a dominant race cannot well exist together. Let the property of the slain come into a common stock, so that no one may be able to secrete anything, or to detach his own interest from ours. Let it be lawful for us and for you to inhabit both banks of the Rhine, as it was of old for our ancestors. As nature has given light and air to all men, so has she thrown open every land to the brave. Resume the manners and customs of your country, renouncing the pleasures, through which, rather than through their arms, the Romans secure their power against subject nations. A pure and untainted race, forgetting your past bondage, you will be the equals of all, or will even rule over others." The inhabitants of the Colony took time for deliberation, and, as dread of the future would not allow them to accept the offered terms, while their actual condition forbade an open and contemptuous rejection, they replied to the following effect: "The very first chance of freedom that presented itself we seized with more eagerness than caution, that we might unite ourselves with you and the other Germans, our kinsmen by blood. With respect to our fortifications, as at this very moment the Roman armies are assembling, it is safer for us to strengthen than to destroy them. All strangers from Italy or the provinces, that may have been in our territory, have either perished in the war, or have fled to their own homes. As for those who in former days settled here, and have been united to us by marriage, and as for their offspring, this is their native land. We cannot think you so unjust as to wish that we should slay our parents, our brothers, and our children. All duties and restrictions on trade we repeal. Let there be a free passage across the river, but let it be during the day-time and for persons unarmed, till the new and recent privileges assume by usage the stability of time. As arbiters between us we will have Civilis and Veleda; under their sanction the treaty shall be ratified." The Tencteri were thus appeased, and ambassadors were sent with presents to Civilis and Veleda, who settled everything to the satisfaction of the inhabitants of the Colony. They were not, however, allowed to approach or address Veleda herself. In order to inspire them with more respect they were prevented from seeing her. She dwelt in a lofty tower, and one of her relatives, chosen for the purpose, conveyed, like the messenger of a divinity, the questions and answers. (Tacitus, History, Book 4, 64-65) From this we learn that some of the Roman coloniests had no problem to inter-merry with the native Germans (this btw was also a factor that advance the Romanification of the provines).

There was a movie made of the Teutoburger forest battle in 1967 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144962/

Suetonius telling of the afair of Caesar with the Bithenian king: