Most Influential Gentes of the Republic

[G-Manicus]

Hmmmm ....

 

34 9 Menenia

 

 

And from the "Your Hidden Roman Name" thread:

 

G-Manicus, you are a member of the Menenia gens, "a very ancient and illustrious patrician house at Rome..."

 

 

34th place? Obviously, I need to start spreading around some of my vast financial holdings. This is not acceptable.

 

(EDIT - actually it's worse ... we're tied for 77th place! Oh the humanity! )

 

(PS - Interesting list / discussion)

Edited September 24, 2007 by G-Manicus

[ASCLEPIADES]

This is what I'll be working on next, for this little project.

-- Nephele

 

Salve, Lady N!

 

Your project may be anything but little. I'm sure it will be extremely rewarding for all your efforts.

 

The points that I brought up were trying to contribute to the patrician : plebeian comparison on the statistical analysis in some aspects that I felt maybe not all of us were aware of.

 

If these observations are not useful for you, then I won't address these or any other related points again.

 

Actually, I didn't make any suggestion.

 

I have no access to the Broughton's list or database; if you can send it to me and you really think I may be helpful, I will love to try to contribute to your efforts..

 

I tried not to sound rude; if that was the case, a sincere apology.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Asclepiades, I think you could follow up on some of your suggestions simply using Smith's dictionary (on line) and Nephele's list.

[Nephele]

Salve Asclepiades. I didn't think you were rude, and your interest is appreciated. As MPC suggests, you can compile a list of those plebian branches of the otherwise patrician gentes by using Smith's. Not all plebian branches listed in Smith's, though, will appear in Broughton's lists of magistracies. As I stated previously, I will be compiling an extended list of Roman families from Broughton's, which will include these branches.

 

As to your request for the lists or database, sadly, Broughton's is accessible only in book form, and you may have to visit your public or university library to find these volumes.

 

I'll get to your question about the cognomen of Catilina (in the other topic) later. Sadly, I have to tend to the daily grind at my job, right now.

 

G-Manicus (a.k.a. Menenius), your gens may not be at the top of the list, but hey, you did make the list!

 

-- Nephele

[ASCLEPIADES]

Asclepiades, I think you could follow up on some of your suggestions simply using Smith's dictionary (on line) and Nephele's list.

 

I don't mean for this to sound rude, but I made no suggestions. And that is not going to change simply by repeating yourself.

 

About your suggestions to me (Post #13) the first and the second require the same database that you demanded (post #2).

 

The third is probably impossible even with it.

Edited September 24, 2007 by ASCLEPIADES

[Primus Pilus]

A fascinating project...

 

I am interested especially in the breakdown of magistracies with imperium per family vs. those without. While in theory, those families with the most number of overall magistracies should have a proportionally higher number of magistracies with imperium, I'm more interested in the families with less overall magistracies. Is the trend that those families would only have a one or two extraordinary individuals who rose to the top (thereby having 3 or 4 magistracies between 2 people), or rather several individuals who were only elected as quaestors, for instance.

[Vibius Tiberius Costa]

Example:

 

For the Valerii, 32% of their names appear as having held office during the 1st century BCE, 20% during the 2nd century, 20% during the 3rd, 13% during the 4th, 10% during the 5th, and 5% during the 6th. For the Fabii, 19.5% of their names appear as having held office during the 1st century, 22% during the 2nd, 22% during the 3rd, 19.5% during the 4th, and 17% during the 5th.

 

-- Nephele

 

Hey there

 

In the percentages above you gave percentages in each century could you reply or PM me with a percentage spectrum of the 2nd century senators and if you had it available, please don't go to any special lengths the percentage of each family in the 2nd century. Don't go out your way but I would be most grateful if you could do this.

 

vtc

[Nephele]

Thanks, Primus Pilus. I'll be including the families that contributed only one member to the magistracies, in my revised list. It'll be an expanded list, because there were quite a few of these.

 

Hey there

 

In the percentages above you gave percentages in each century could you reply or PM me with a percentage spectrum of the 2nd century senators and if you had it available, please don't go to any special lengths the percentage of each family in the 2nd century. Don't go out your way but I would be most grateful if you could do this.

 

vtc

 

Hi, VTC. Broughton's doesn't list Senators specifically, but since election to magisterial offices brought one into the Senatorial class (for a lifetime seat), then the names of the magistrates could be counted as Senate representatives, too. I could give you a few names from Broughton's lists for the 2nd century, but it would be pretty time-consuming to go over each list of magistrates individually for a 100-year period to make a note of each individual name. If, when I re-do my initial list, it turns out that I'm compiling the information that way after all, I'll send you what I get. Is this for that book you're planning to write?

 

-- Nephele

Edited September 25, 2007 by Nephele

[Pompieus]

Would a listing of consuls of the years 366-1BC by gens be of any use? I hesitate to mention it because I'm not sure the database I made is completely accurate and I'm not sure I know how to attach the list. I'll try...

 

CONSULs By GENS 366-1BCE (including Suffectus)

NOMEN CONSULS NOMEN CONSULSHIPS

Cornelius 70 Cornelius 75

Valerius 30 Valerius 38

Aemelius 25 Fabius 33

Fabius 22 Aemelius 30

Claudius 22 Claudius 24

Fulvius 18 Marcius 22

Caecilius 18 Sulpicius 22

Licinius 17 Iulius 22

Marcius 16 Fulvius 21

Sulpicius 15 Manlius 20

Servilius 15 Caecilius 19

Iunius 15 Postumius 19

Manlius 14 Servilius 18

Postumius 14 Iunius 18

Calpurnius 14 Licinius 17

Sempronius 13 Sempronius 16

Atilius 11 Atilius 16

Aurelius 11 Papirius 15

Domitius 11 Calpurnius 14

Plautius 9 Aurelius 12

Quinctius 8 Domitius 12

Cassius 7 Plautius 9

Papirius 7 Quinctius 9

Iulius 6 Popilius 9

Pompieus 6 Pompieus 8

Livius 6 Cassius 7

Mucius 6 Livius 7

Genucius 5 Genucius 7

Popilius 5 Mucius 6

Antonius 5 Antonius 6

Minucius 5 Furius 6

Otaciliuis 5 Decius 6

Porcius 5 Minucius 5

Lutatius 5 Otacilius 5

Furius 4 Porcius 5

Decius 3 Lutatius 5

Veturius 3 Veturius 4

Tullius 3 Tullius 3

Caninius 3 Caninius 3

Otacilius 2 Otacilius 3

Vipsanius 1 Vipsanius 3

25 Tied w 2

 

There... I graphed this list and it looks remarkably like Marcus Porcius' I REALLY dont know how to attach a graph.

The variation between consuls and consulships is accounted for by iteration which was common until about 200 BC.

I had to fudge a little to get the data sorted this way as the querys I have all look at gens with multiple consuls there are also 50 -60 nomen that appear only once.

[Nephele]

This looks like an interesting list, Pompeius, although I'm having a little trouble interpreting it. Would you be inclined to re-do your list to include only the years of the Republic (509 BCE - 31 BCE)? This would significantly change a few of the gentes represented on your list, reducing Vipsanius, for example, from three consulships down to only one.

 

-- Nephele

Edited September 27, 2007 by Nephele

[M. Porcius Cato]

For comparing patricians to plebeians, restricting the starting point to the lex Licinia (367), as Pompeius does, is a good idea, though I agree strongly with Nephele that having a stopping point of 31 makes the most sense, since that's when the lex Saenia changed the composition of the patriciate. Alternatively, keeping the time frame constant (509-31) would at least help us make proper comparisons to assess the overall effect of the lex Licinia.

[Nephele]

For comparing patricians to plebeians, restricting the starting point to the lex Licinia (367), as Pompeius does, is a good idea, though I agree strongly with Nephele that having a stopping point of 31 makes the most sense, since that's when the lex Saenia changed the composition of the patriciate. Alternatively, keeping the time frame constant (509-31) would at least help us make proper comparisons to assess the overall effect of the lex Licinia.

 

Ah, thanks for that reasoning for setting the limits of this survey, MPC. I merely chose 31 BCE as the ending date because this is where my volume of Broughton's ends in its setting of that date as the end of the Republic.

 

However, for a comparison between patricians and plebians in positions of highest power, should we also consider the possibility of 445 BCE as a starting date, with the Lex Canuleia granting consular powers to the military tribunes? I'm finding members of the Sextilia, Antistia, and Trebonia plebian gentes, to name a few, as having held these consular powers.

 

-- Nephele

Edited September 27, 2007 by Nephele

[Pompieus]

You are right -if you are going to do statistics you need to use the same parameters. Here is a list of consuls and consular tribunes from 509 - 27BC

by gens compiled by R Ullfig from a list at www.users.dircon.co.uk/:

Cornelius 106

Valerius 74 (73)

Fabius 66

Aemelius 55

Claudius 43

Furius 41

Servilius 41

Manlius 38

Quinctius 38

Sulpicius 38

Papirius 35

Postumius 35

Iulius 29 (25)

Sempronius 25

Marcius 21

Fulvius 20

Atilius 19

Caecilius 19

Licinius 19 (18)

Iunius 18

Veturius 15

Verginius 13

Aurelius 12

Sergius 12

Domitius 11

Genucius 11

Lucretius 11

Menenius 11

Minucius 11

Antonius 10

Calpurnius 10

Cassius 10

Nautius 10

Popillius 10

Horatius 8

Marius 8

Plautius 8

Pompieus 8

Decius 7

Geganius 7

Acilius 6

Aeliius 6

Livius 6

Mucius 6

Publilius 6

Lutatius 5

Octavius 5

Porcius 5

Carvilius 4

Larcius 4

Poetilius 4

Tullius 4 (3)

Aebutius 3

Aquilius 3

Cloelius 3

Curius 3

Duilius 3

Flaminius 3

Hostilius 3

Mamilius 3

Otacilius 3

Pinarius 3

Pomponius 3

Rutilius 3

Sextius 3

Trebonius 3

Vipsanius 3 (0)

Volumnius 3

Annius 2

Antistius 2 (1)

Appuleius 2 (1)

Aquillius 2

Aulius 2

Baebius 2

Caedicius 2

Caninius 2

Cocceius 2

Cominius 2

Curiatus 2

Fabricius 2

Fannius 2

Flavius 2

Folius 2

Gellius 2

Herennius 2

Herminius 2

Hortensius 2

Laelius 2

Maelius 2

Manilius 2

Norbanus 2

Opimius 2

Perperna 2

Quinctilius 2

Romilius 2

Scribonius 2

Sestius 2

Terentius 2

58 other names appear once - I'll add them on a later post if required- a total of 1209 Magistracies and 157 clans (if my math is right!?). To get back to 27 BC delete:1 Licinius (cos 30), Antistius (suf 30), Tullius (suf 30), Appuleius (29), Valerius (suf 29), 2 Vipsanii (28 27), four Iulii (30 29 28 27), and delete Saenius (Suf 30). Total: 1197 and 156.

 

Note that the following clans show no consuls after 366 that I can find:

Verginius

Sergius

Menenius

Horatius

Geganius

Larcius

Aebutius

Cloelius

Pinarius

Cominius

Curiatus

Fabriciius

Herminius

Maelius

Romilius

Titinius

Edited September 27, 2007 by Pompieus

[Nephele]

Here is a list of consuls and consular tribunes from 509 - 27BC

by gens compiled by R Ullfig from a list at www.users.dircon.co.uk/:

 

Great list! I couldn't get that link to work, but I found Ullfig's list at this link (which includes those gentes that appear only once).

 

-- Nephele

[M. Porcius Cato]

You are right -if you are going to do statistics you need to use the same parameters. Here is a list of consuls and consular tribunes from 509 - 27BC

 

Great--this is a valuable piece of information. Nephele has posted the number of magistrates per family (thus, G. Marius would count only once under Maria); this lists the number of consular magistracies per family (thus, G. Marius would count six times under Maria). Once we get the number of consular magistrates per family, we can begin the statistics again.