Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Pompieus last won the day on April 1 2017

Pompieus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 Good

1 Follower

About Pompieus

  • Rank
    Tribunus Angusticlavius

Profile Information

  • Location
    Alexandria, VA

Recent Profile Visitors

14,223 profile views
  1. Tacitus (xiv.31-33) says two Roman towns were destroyed by the rebels. Camulodunum (Colonia Victricensis) the provincial capitol - now, supposedly, Colchester; and the municipium Verulamium - southwest of modern St Albans. London was also sacked and destroyed, and though it was a significant settlement (probably as populous as either of the others) it was not yet 'officially' a Roman town. Cassius Dio also says two towns were destroyed, he took his account mostly from Tacitus. A glance at the map shows Chelmsford in the path of destruction (between London and Camulodunum), and there was a settlement there in 61 (Caesarmagus). So it may well have been destroyed in the revolt but was too small to be mentioned in the sources.
  2. Pompieus


    Lintott ("Constitution of the Roman Republic" pg 75) says that the Senate could meet "on any day - including dies nefaste" but gives no reference. William Smith's Classical dictionary says "meetings could be convoked on "any day that was not atri (?)." Both agree that regular meetings (senatus legitimus) were held every month on the calends, nones and ides, and that extraordinary meetings (senatus indictus) could be held on any other day, except when the comitia were meeting. However, the Senate was summoned to meet during the assembly meetings that led to the deaths of the Gracchi. Lintott pg 44 refers to Macrobius (Saturnalia) 1.16.30 which mentions a Lex Hortensia which made market-days fasti but not comitiales. (?)
  3. Pompieus

    Senatus Consultatum

    Persians? In the first century BC Iran was controlled by the Arsacid dynasty. The Arsacids were Parthians, originally from northern Iran. "Persia" usually means southern Iran, from which the Achaemenid and Sassanian dynasties arose. There is not a lot of data on the Parthians other than coins and references in surviving Greek and Latin literature. Even the Arsacid "king list" is not totally clear, but probably included Mithridates II ~123-88BC, Artabanus II or Orodes ~80, and Sinatruces ~77-70. Mithridates II sent an envoy to Sulla requesting friendship and alliance in 92BC, and in 72BC Sinatruces refused a request for help from Mithridates of Pontus.
  4. Cincinnatus was no "emperor" (?!), he was (probably) appointed suffect (substitute) consul of the Roman Republic in 460BCE upon the death of the sitting consul, and dictator in 458 to meet a military crisis. He may (possibly) have been dictator again in 439 to deal with the supposed usurpation of Spurius Maelius. Cincinnatus was legendary for civic virtue and simple life, and was a strong opponent of plebian rights. The story (legend?) is in Livy books iii and iv, and he is mentioned by Pliny and Cicero.
  5. Pompieus

    Serving in home province.

    According to Cheeseman, Holder and Spaul all Auxiliary units attested as serving in Britain were originally recruited elsewhere (mainly Spain, Gaul and Illyria). Evidence of the 18 or so Alae and Cohortes known to have been recruited in Britain (Britonum/Britanica/Britanorum) is also found elsewhere (Mauritania, Germany and the Danube). This applies mainly to the 1st & 2nd centuries AD. Later, local recruiting became the norm and evidence of soldiers origins becomes rare. But some units like the oriental archers, and possibly units from Britain, received drafts of men from home well into the 2nd century AD.
  6. Pompieus

    Gaius Marius and the Gracchi

    As you say, Roman political alliances were personal, various and shifting. Several prominent men supported Tiberius Gracchus. Appius Claudius Pulcher the princeps senatus was his father in law, Publius Licinius Crassus Dives cos 131 and soon to be pontifex maximus was Gaius Gracchus' father in law. Other prominent supporters were Marcus Fulvius Flaccus (cos 125), Gaius Porcius Cato (cos 114) grandson of the censor, Publius Mucius Scaevola (cos 133) and Gaius Papirius Carbo (cos 120). It is possible that the enmity between Scipio and Tiberius Gracchus dated from the Mancinus episode in 137. Gaius Cato and the Metelli had also once been friends of Scipio but had become estranged for some reason according to Cicero. In 138 Scipio personally prosecuted Lucius Aurelius Cotta, the father of Marius' opponent in 119 for bribery, and Metellus Macedonicus, the father of Delmaticus, defended him. If Marius was originally a client of the Metelli (as Plutarch says) he could possibly have served under Metellus Belearicus in 123-122. Sallust says Marius was elected military tribune, but not when (134-133?). Broughton (Magistrates of the Roman Republic) says he was probably quaestor in 121 or 120.
  7. Pompieus

    Gaius Marius and the Gracchi

    There is nothing specific in the sources about Marius' attitude toward the Gracchan reforms, but during his tribunate (119BC) Marius proposed a "popularis" law that altered the procedure in elections. Apparently, it involved narrowing the pontes over which the voters approached the ballot boxes with the intention of reducing the ability of the nobles or their agents to pressure the voters. The measure was violently opposed by the consul L Aurelius Cotta who demanded Marius appear before the senate and explain his action (possibly Marius had not previously obtained senatorial approval). This resulted in an angry debate during which the other consul L Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus (Marius' erstwhile patron) supported Cotta. Marius is said to have ordered Metellus' arrest, whereupon the opposition collapsed and the bill passed. Possibly this irritated the nobility enough that they used their influence to defeat Marius' election to the aedileship, and to prosecute him for bribery after he won the last place in the praetorian election (115BC). The sources don't specifically say whether Marius ever met his nephew either
  8. Pompieus


    Sometime between ages 15-17 a Roman boy "came of age", hung up his bullae, donned the toga virilis and was registered on the roll of Roman citizens. But, if his father was still alive, didn't the father legally control any property the son might possess under patria potestas? In what property class did the censors register a son who's father still lived? Was there some legal way for the son of a living senator or equestrian father to hold property so as to be registered in the centuries of equites or the iuniores of the First Class?
  9. Pompieus


    The surviving manuscripts of the Notitia include shield patterns for units of the late Empire field armies. Luke's ancient military history website displays and discusses them. lukeuedasarson.com/NotitiaPatterns.html
  10. Pompieus


    I can't find anything definitive in primary or secondary sources either. Livy (26.22, 27.6) indicates that each century announced two winners, but nowhere does anybody say whether individual voters submitted one name or two.
  11. Pompieus


    When voting in the Centuriate Assembly to elect consuls, did the individual Roman citizen vote for a single candidate, or did he vote for two (one for each of the two consulships)? Similarly for the four/six/eight praetors? Is there evidence?
  12. Alexander engaged in every type of warfare, and was victorious in all of them. He defeated armies of Greek hoplites, Iranian cavalry and asiatic masses, barbarian tribes and Indian Rajahs; besieged and captured great Greek and Phoenician cities, as well as remote, inaccessible, rock-bound mountain strongholds; succeeded in guerilla warfare against hill and mountain tribes, and defeated steppe horse-warriors. No army, city or people in arms ever defeated him. Nobody, not Pyrrhus, Hannibal, Scipio, Cyrus, Caesar, or his father Phillip were as successful.
  13. Pompieus

    How Did the Political Structure in Rome influence U.S. Political Structure

    The founding fathers of the US were interested by the concepts of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances" between magistrates, senate and popular assemblies they saw in book VI of Polybius.
  14. Could be, the sources (Claudian, Zosimus V, and Orosius VII.36) are not much help. But the special title conferred on Gildo (Claudian says he ruled from the Atlas to the Nile (?)), the fact that he was a Moorish king, that he cut off the grain supply to Rome, remained neutral in the war between Theodosius and Eugenius, held his office for 12 years, and negotiated with Eutropius and Arcadius indicate he had wide control. Gibbon says he "usurped" the administration of justice and finance; but was it before or after he rebelled?
  15. The comes Africae was the commander of the field army of Africa. There was a separate comes Tingitania for the Mauritanias. Gildo had the special title of magister utriusque militiae per Africum. A H M Jones says that the comes Africa also controlled the frontier guards; but that instead of alae and cohortes under a dux, the frontier was guarded by barbarian tribesmen (gentiles) under several praepositi settled along a frontier wall (fosse) on the condition they maintain and defend it. Hard to see how he could have rebelled without getting the support of the civil governors.