spittle

That quote (in its context) reminds me of the guy who decided not to manage the beatles. OCTAVIAN - Just a name!

Did he say that to Brutus by any chance??? I imagine he made some fairly extreme 'quotes' concerning Cicero. What personal dynamics! A low born snob and one of the high society elite with a passion for slumming it.

According to the link above George Washington was regarded as a modern Cinncinatus. So if the naming of Cincinnati happened after the Revolutionary War maybe it was another way of honouring GW ??? Afterall with the capital city and a major state both named after Washington it would have been an alternative way to praise him. And the statue would fit the name. Just my guess.

In the TV Series "Rome" Lucius Vorenus describes Mark Antony's performance as Tribune of Plebs with this paragraph: "He operates with a whore and a dwarf at his side. Even Cincinnatis or the Gracchi would not behave so..." Who was Cincinnatis???

What about Michael Grant's JULIUS CAESAR biog??? Anyone read it? How do you rate Grant's other books?

I took neither insult or demeanor from your comments. I enjoy the discussion. QUOTE FROM PRIMUS PILATE "You make good points, but you must consider that every modern account of ancient events is based on various interpretations of the ancient sources. Without them, modern historical works would be little more than guesswork. Because these accounts exist we can attempt to filter through the propoganda , bias and sometimes lack of scholarly approach, otherwise we would be left with inscriptions and busts as our sole sources." (I don't know how to use the quote thing). Without first reading modern scholars accounts how would I know the reasons for bias that flavoured the contemporary accounts?

I would also like to participate. My first choice would be the Gary Forsythe "Critical History of Early Rome" book. I'd like to compare it to "The Beginnings of Rome" by T J Cornell. which I have just purchased. I'm considering turning my 6 year daughter into a chimney sweep so I can afford to buy this book but don't let that influence your decision.

Kenneth Cranham was the character actor that really stood out to me also. I only wish it had started a generation earlier with Sulla, marius and the young Pompey. Still, the show was fantastic and I look forward to the next series. Augustus v Antony!!! (I wonder who will win?)

With respect to Gaius Octavius, I cannot see how a retrogressive approach (to virtually ANY historical subject) is wrong. On the years I spent researching Organised Crime it was the only way of excluding urban myths and journalistic fictions that have become legendary or accepted. First by recognizing the source of these untruths, then by finding the reasons for there inception. It was a very effective method. PLUS. Contemporary sources tended to be propagandist and partisan. After a few millenia modern authors tend to be less bothered about such things as flattering Pompey (Or Caesar) due to side-taking. And finally. many of the "Primary Sources" were written decades or even centuries after the events! In two thousand years maybe the history paper I wrote on William of Orange (1688) may be considered primary but its not really.

I have a complete lack of intellectual stamina and, thus, find accounts from pre 1900 (even such as Dickens) long winded, flowery and dull. I accept that this is an area I need to work on or forever forego the primary sources, which is unthinkable. However, as I am new to this subject I hope to educate myself on the theories of the modern scholars before taking on the might of the ancients. I hope to seek advice in this respect at a later date.

I have just ordered the above suggested book from Amazon and I'll post my opinions. Another title that seems to deal with this era is "A Critical History of early Rome: From Pre-History to the First Punic War" By Gary Forsythe. Maybe a concise and catalogued bibliography would be a helpful edition to this site?

"Decimation" According to Tom Holland (Rubicon) Crassus reintroduced the ancient tradition of decimation after a few legions performed badly against the Spartacus rebels. Don't shoot the messenger! I'm only repeating what I read and you guys are far more informed than I am.

but they did get back the eagles?

Thanks guys (and gals?). I'm new to this subject and I'v just started to read RUBICON by Tom Holland, I chose this over Grants book through pure chance, but it jumps from very sketchy info concerning the latter Kings to the mid-Republic (Grachii). I have difficulty concentrating on the real heavy classics and prefer the easier, modern authors interpretations. Before becoming interested in Rome I spent 3 years reading about Organised Crime (mostly in America and Italy) and the last year I have dedicated to English Tudor history. The Mafia forums tend to degenerate into ethnic arguments as Italian Americans insult Irish Americans or visa versa. This site looks far more relevent to the issues at hand.

I am new to this subject so please forgive my ignorance. Could anyone suggest sources of information concerning the pre-republican monarchy and/or the pre-Roman civilisations that preceeded and directly lead to Rome. It fascinated me that even at the time of Caesars assassination the Brutus name was already ancient and, by extension, this lead me to the assumption that the earliest days of the republic and the latter days of monarchy must be chronicled in some form.