Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Caesar CXXXVII

Equites
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    433

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Caesar CXXXVII

  1. Could a consul have the right to do what he did ?

    in Res Publica

    Posted · Edited by Caesar CXXXVII

    What exactly do you mean by "possibility to nominate a consul by another consul"? the people who sought public would have to nominate themselves and as Manlius competed in the original election in which Fulvius was elected clearly he was nominated in this manner.

     

    The election were conducted by the outgoing magistratus (in this case the outgoing Consuls) if not all the magistares were elected in one day the Comitia would continue in another day with the same nominees that weren't elected. I suppose it's possible that the newly elected Consul would conduct the election if the outgoing Consuls wasn't available for some reason.

     

    Could you give references to ancient sources that deal with this affair?

     

     

    Livy 37.47 - " M. Aemilius Lepidus was a candidate...The other competitors were M. Fulvius Nobilior, Cn. Manlius Volso and M. Valerius Messala. Fulvius was the only one elected, none of the others secured the requisite majority of votes. Fulvius, on the following day, co-opted Cn. Manlius; he had succeeded in getting Lepidus defeated, and Messala was at the bottom of the poll" .

     

    As you see, Livy had two versions for the case -

    1. Fulvius co-opted Manlius

    2. Manlius succeeded in getting Lepidus defeated

     

    There is no problem with ver. 2 although some scholars (can't remember) said that Fulvius disqualify Lepidus - how ?

    The problem is the co-optetion, it means that Fulvius nominated Manlius without a vote ! How could he have done it ?

  2. Could a consul have the right to do what he did ?

    in Res Publica

    Posted · Edited by Caesar CXXXVII

    We are told that for the elections to the consulate of 189 there were 3 Patrician candidates - Marcus Aemilius Lepidus (young, famous and energetic, the leading candidate), Gnaeus Manlius Vulso (his third attempt...) and Marcus Valerius Maximus Mesala (incopetent by all accounts) . Lepidus had problems with the senate so he failed to achive a majority, as Manlius . No Patrician consul was elected, just a Plebeian one - Marcus Fulvius Nobilior . The comitia assembled the next day and Manlius was the victor .

    Now, there are two versions about how Manlius "won" -

    1. Fulvius coducted the elections, disqualified Lepidus (we don't know the excuse) and Manlius achived the majority .

    2. Fulvius nominated Manlius directly, with out elections !!!

     

    I have found (Develin and others) that there was the possibility to nominate a consul by another consul (elect) , but how ? what was the judicial procedure ?

  3. Reliance on individual generals in the Western Roman Empire?

    in Gloria Exercitus - 'Glory of the Army'

    Posted

    Wasn't there a piece of legislation, about this time, which prevented men of senatorial rank from assuming officerships in the army? I've forgotten exactly when it was passed, but i know it was mid to late 4th century. Possibly drawn up to prevent usurpation, it resulted in an army in which the Roman ruling classes now had no direct involvement.

     

     

    Interesting, do we have a source ?

  5. Decapolis

    in Academia

    Posted

    Peter Richardson, "Herod: King of the Jews and Friend of the Romans" says that the Decapolis were "A loose association of Hellenistic cities" . He based his notion on about 15 works and named them in page 88, note 25 .

    ‏

  7. The book of revelation

    in Templum Romae - Temple of Rome

    Posted

    Saw, the other day, a history channel program about the book etc' . Today scholars tend to regard it as a manifest against the Roman empire . A question rises - What the pagan Romans thought about the book ? did they know about it ? did they refer to the book ? Any ancient pagan source ?

     

    ( :) Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione :P )

  8. The kidnapping of Scipio

    in Res Publica

    Posted

    I am convinced. The material is very fragmented but the fact is well recorded . Non the less, it seems that ancient historians have tried not to do with it (bad English, bad) a big issue .

    Caeser used his case to promote his special personality, the Scipio's did not used it and that is the the whole issue - There is the possibilty that something bad for them went on . But again, we don't know what went on so we can just speculate (maybe Scipio did negotiated with Antiochus about his son, a very shamful thing for a "true" Roman) .

  9. How to bypass the 22nd amendment

    in Hora Postilla Thermae

    Posted

    Nevertheless, for the time being it seems that the only existing "ban" consists of the unwillingness of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush to challenge the wording of the 22nd Amendment. Until they (or some future, twice-elected President) decides to do so, I don't think we can have a definitive answer to that question.

     

    -- Nephele

     

     

    Yes. I agree, It is all very theoretical but who know...

  10. Was the rise of Christianity inevitable?

    in Templum Romae - Temple of Rome

    Posted

    Off topic (?) - what did Constantinus and his army saw on that day ? Did the soldiers saw it ? How he, Constantinus, convinced his army that "it" relates to Jesus ? Primary sources ?

    Thanks

     

    Constantine the great? anyway that event before the Battle of the Milvian bridge, there are differing accounts on if Constantine saw it in a dream or his soldiers also saw it before the battle. The former is far more believable, anyway the symbol that he saw was the greek name for Christ, P = CHI, X = RHO, the P intersects the X. Further more there was other writing that proclaimed that "in this sign you will conquer"

     

    anyway primary sources would be Lactantius and the early church historian Eusebius of Caesarea

     

    edit: the symbol is my avatar with the addition of the greek letters Alpha and omega signifying that christ is the beginning and the end

     

     

    O.K. I will try to be more specific (and sensitive) - What was the natural phenomena that Constantinus and/or his companions interprated as the "Greek name for Christ" ?

  11. The kidnapping of Scipio

    in Res Publica

    Posted

    Livy's account is perhaps the best in my opinion because he admits quite readily that the details are a bit sketchy. That in itself makes it oddly more believable to me.

     

    Here's his account... http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah/Livy/Liv...livy.hist.37.34

     

    Attalus.org has the full list of related source materials on it... http://attalus.org/bc2/year191.html#8

     

    The most prominent story among them all seems to be that he was captured at sea in Greece.

     

     

    Thanks PP, I agree that the more sketchy the detailes, the more believable they are . So, let say he was captured at sea (Aegean), how come that such an important fact as the capture of the son of the great Scipio, faded (I hope that is the word) ? I mean, did the Roman historians were influenced by the Scipionic circle to erase the fact ?

  15. How to bypass the 22nd amendment

    in Hora Postilla Thermae

    Posted

    Can't find an answer to the question - Is there any ban on ex U.S. president (after one term, two terms and/or partial term) to run for vice president ?

     

    If there is no ban, he could serve more than the 10 years limit of the 22nd amendment (8 years + maximum two years of the former presidency) !

     

    Just for the sake of clarity .

     

     

    I believe the 12th Amendment has that covered:

     

    "The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

    -- 12th Amendment, U.S. Constitution

     

    "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."

    -- 22nd Amendment, U.S. Constitution

     

    -- Nephele

     

     

    But the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election (Michael C. Dorf. "Why the Constitution permits a Gore-Clinton ticket", CNN Interactive and Scott E. Gant; Bruce G. Peabody (2006-06-13). "How to bring back Bill", Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved on 12 June 2008)

  16. How to bypass the 22nd amendment

    in Hora Postilla Thermae

    Posted

    Can't find an answer to the question - Is there any ban on ex U.S. president (after one term, two terms and/or partial term) to run for vice president ?

     

    If there is no ban, he could serve more than the 10 years limit of the 22nd amendment (8 years + maximum two years of the former presidency) !

     

    Just for the sake of clarity .

  18. Rome Provoked

    in Gloria Exercitus - 'Glory of the Army'

    Posted

    I read somewhere (brain toot I don't remember where) that in Acient Rome didn't start a war unless provoked. I am not versed in the Punic Wars or any other wars in Rome for that matter, but what is the real story? Thanks

     

     

     

    A very good book about the question, with regard to the Punic wars, is this - "Unplanned Wars: The Origins of the First and Second Punic Wars‎", by B. Dexter Hoyos - 1998

    Romans, British and Hillforts, Oh My!

    in Tartarus

    Posted

    I've cleaned up the thread. I don't care who started what, who is responsible for escalation, etc. Simply, just stop it.

     

    This is Falkor's topic. He clearly is interested in Roman sites in Britain rather than Roman-British site. The topic title has been adjusted to reflect this. For the sake of harmony, Please refrain from posting non Roman sites in this thread whether this is a personally agreeable sentiment or not.

     

    That being said... Falkor, restrain your language. That is not the sort of thing that this forum is about. We're all big boys and can handle it, but it's entirely disrespectful to the community as a whole.

     

     

    Wo o o o o o o o o o o o o o ww ! The first "fxxx you" in UNRV !! Yes !!! :no2::no2::no2:

     

    Now it is in tartarus... :D

  23. Time to rewrite the history books

    in Imperium Romanorum

    Posted

    The extent of Roman activity in Germania is hinted at throughout accounts of the period, so whilst there's definitely room for archaeological research and a refinement of our ideas, rewriting the history books? Not yet.

     

     

    I have thought so too .

    It would be nice to see some sources about roman activity in the region after 40 or 50

  24. Tacitus' identity

    in Academia

    Posted

    I really think these sort of speculations are just something for academics to do on their days off. They are a complete waste of everyone's time and energy.

     

     

    Damn ! The whole idea of forum is to burn some time, no ? Better than that - to burn time at work...

×
×
  • Create New...