Magistrates of the Roman Republic

[Mosquito]

In this view, when we see praetors or even consuls at tribal assemblies, their presence merely indicates that they are putting their support behind an action that is technically made by tribunes of the plebs. I'm not entirely persuaded by this argument, but I can see why the chart was drawn up as it was.

 

 

One consul always was a plebeian. As well as many of the praetors. Patricians were not entering into plebeian assemblies but watching it from distance. If i remember well patricians were usually staying at curia hostillia.

 

I didnt say that it was lex hortensia that was forbidding patricians to take part in concilium plebis. It could have been mos maiorum as well.

 

Patricians were allowed to take part and vote in Comitia Tributa, simply because everyone of them belonged to one tribus or other.

Affcourse in the last 2 centuries of the republic social division on patricians and plebeians was already outdated and had more religious importance than really political because there was already new kind of aristocracy called nobilitas to wich belonged both best patrician and plebeian famillies.

[Gaius Octavius]

One consul always was a plebeian.

 

 

I am lost.

[Mosquito]

One consul always was a plebeian.

 

 

I am lost.

 

 

Why? Since the year 367 BC, after bills of Gaius Licinius Stolo and Lucius Sextius Lateranus, plebeians were allowed to be elected for consuls and one of the consuls had to be plebeian. Finally in the year 342 BC, the assembly passed law which allowed to elect both consuls plebeians.

[Gaius Octavius]

One consul always was a plebeian.

 

 

I am lost.

 

 

Why? Since the year 367 BC, after bills of Gaius Licinius Stolo and Lucius Sextius Lateranus, plebeians were allowed to be elected for consuls and one of the consuls had to be plebeian. Finally in the year 342 BC, the assembly passed law which allowed to elect both consuls plebeians.

 

When Caesar was elected consul, were both plebeians?

[Mosquito]

When Caesar was elected consul, were both plebeians?

 

Caesar was a consul in pair with Bibulus who was member of gens Calpurnii - arisotcratic plebeian familly. So one of the consuls - Caesar was from patrician gens iulii and second from plebeian gens calpurnii

Edited January 29, 2007 by Mosquito

[Gaius Octavius]

The latter part of this thread has been about 'oligarchy'. Am I being told that a dirt farmer or a city ruffian could become consul? If so, who?

[Mosquito]

The latter part of this thread has been about 'oligarchy'. Am I being told that a dirt farmer or a city ruffian could become consul? If so, who?

 

I dont understand what are you talking about. In the late republic aristocracy was made by the best patrician and plebeian famillies. This new aristocracy was called "NOBILITAS". A dirt farmer or city ruffian would never become a consul. Those plebeians were extremly rich and their famillies were as old and as noble as patrician famillies. Usually those best patrician and plebeian famillies were related because of marriages. It were plebeians who had fathers, grandfathers and grand grand fathers consuls and senators.

[M. Porcius Cato]

The latter part of this thread has been about 'oligarchy'. Am I being told that a dirt farmer or a city ruffian could become consul? If so, who?

 

Not all plebs were 'dirt farmers'. Pompey, Crassus, and Lucullus were plebs--all obviously rich. Pleb is a hereditary category, not an economic one.

 

As far as a 'dirt farmer' consul goes, I guess Dentatus was pretty close to a dirt farmer (but that's just off the top of my head). Maybe Cincinnatus and Regulus too? I'm just guessing.

 

BTW, why the fixation on consuls?

Edited January 30, 2007 by M. Porcius Cato

[Mosquito]

Not all plebs were 'dirt farmers'. Pompey, Crassus, and Lucullus were plebs--all obviously rich. Pleb is a hereditary category, not an economic one.

 

Aye, Cato is right. There were really few patricians who could compare themselves with such aristocrate like Lucullus.

 

I suggest reading "Social history of Rome" by Geza Alfoldy

 

http://www.amazon.com/Social-History-Rome-...y/dp/0389205834

Edited January 30, 2007 by Mosquito

[Gaius Octavius]

BTW, why the fixation on consuls?

 

That old saw: 'Any American kid can become president.'

[M. Porcius Cato]

BTW, why the fixation on consuls?

That old saw: 'Any American kid can become president.'

 

Right--the word 'can' only refers to the legal possibility, not the statistical likelihood. The probability of any American kid (rich or poor) becoming president is infinitesimal: even in a super-biased system, where a rich kid has a 100-fold advantage, we're talking about "nearly zero" rising to "nearly zero". For that reason, I think it's more telling to look at all levels of government, not just the nearly impossible ones. Plenty of your 'dirt farmers' and 'city ruffians' have been elected to state and city government.