haimore

8, I got 8 correct.

Well, that's the problem, when times were tight the aediles assigned to the treasury would mint coins that had a "face value" equal to that of it's predecessor, but weighed less...or minted from inferior metal, etc. It would be quite difficult to do a dollar to sesterces exchange, I know I'm not smart enough to do it.

I'd address the Senate on March 13th 44BC and warn them of the impending disaster if Ceasar is assasinated.

I'm not smart enough on the subject to comment...other than to say...Oh...My goodness.

Yep, Stalin was responsible for more deaths, over all, than Hitler, and Mao, even more than Stalin. The Romans were indeed quite liberal for their day...among the most liberal. I think we get our jaundiced view of them from our christian back ground...what we read in the New Testament and the exaggerated (but still very real) persecutions.

Jim, Thanks for the analysis.

Rome would have looked at least a little bit different had Ceasar lived I suspect.

Actually, almost all the names added had a "bad" conotation, but were worn with pride by those who received them....usually.

Hard to answer the question...you've also got to figure in time frames too. Hitler was in power...what...12 years? He was responsible in that time for the death of not 6 million...that was just the Jews...his total casualty list is closer to 50 million.

Too funny

Hannibal could have won...or been defeated much earlier. In any case he wasn't smart enough to exploit his success, and Rome didn't field a general smart enough to defeat him in open battle..it's almost like there was a morale problem for the Legions until they got over to Africa...I really suspect this was part of the problem.

Some historians have speculated that Ceasar didn't have too much time left anyhow. They suspect he knew he was dying which is why he let himself be trapped. On the otherhand, my read on his personality is that he would have twarted them had he known what was coming. I guess the first question one has to ask is would his campaign against the Parthians have been sucessful, or would he suffer Crassus fate? Would we even know his name other than that of one more General who aided in the destruction of the Republic had he not been murdered in the Senate and died in Parthia? Or would he have set himself up as the first Emperor upon his triumphant return? Would he have resigned his dictatorship when he thought he had successfully reformed the government? So many "ifs" and it's a fun game.

Why was the public dole cut? Because Ceasar (correctly) didn't think it was the Governemnts business to be handing out food...he was hoping that people would begin to leave the city and find employment elsewhere.

Church Latin sounds pretty impressive...but Latin Class in HS was a pain...glad I took it though...it made picking up Spanish a LOT easier.

Awesome...this should be good. I've been disappointed by TLC productions so far.

What the Bear Guy said.

Let me preface this by saying that I am a Christian...in fact I'm a Catholic Christian. I disagree with the premise entirely because the Mithra cult was running neck and neck with Christianity for a long time to become the dominant religion in Emperial Rome.

Latin didn't die...it evolved....into Italian...and French...and Spanish...and it's most direct descendent...Romani...spoken in Switzerland near the Italian border.

No discussion of the Mithra cult along with Christianity? I think in the end it was these two cults the Mithra cult and the Jesus cult...that was battling for the hearts and minds of the general populace... Some like to claim that Christianity "adopted" aspects of Mithraism to make Christianity more palatable to the "pagans" my read on it is that the religions were similar and that rather than adopt and adapt..the christians set themselves up in opposition to the pagans....for example...Christmas was not an adoption of the feast of Sol Invictus, but rather was set up in opposition to it...just my read on it.

I say it went down to Generalship...not overall tactics. Pound for pound...and all else being equal...the Legion was the best formation of it's time...Hanibal was just the better General...but didn't know how to win war...only battles.

Actually the Augusti Diocletian gets the credit for tying the tenant farmers to the land...this was the birth of fuedalism. It was part of his "economic reform."

Actually, Quintius Fabius Maximus Cunctator gets the credit for that tactic...and the Senate was not smart enough to adopt it after his dictatorship ended.

Hey folks...glad I found this site...Ancient Rome is my favorite area of Study. About myself...I'm a 40 year old soldier in the US Army studying with UMUC for a degree in history. I've commented on a few threads already...the discussions are quite interesting. Looking forward to getting to know the board. Mike

All those "What ifs" What if Ceasar hadn't been slain on the Ides of March...would his campaign in the East been successful? What if Augustus had pushed the borders of the empire to the Ural mountains?

My personal opinion is that you can't blame one person or event for the fall of the Republic...it started I think we all agree...with the Grachii...and I think most will agree that when Sulla marched on Rome it was pretty much the death of the Republic...if one group of people are to bear the brunt of the blame it has to be the Senate itself...or for that matter...the people of Rome.