Fulvia
-
Posts
104 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Fulvia
-
-
-
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1641409/2...ml?xrs=share_fb
I'll hold my loaded opinion for a few breaths.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
P.S. Totally unrelated question, I know, but is this the guy from Bones (TV series)?
Yup!
-
How about Sertorius? Not so much trained in the army as he was a part of it. He was kind of continuing a war that had already ended but he he certainly was a royal pain in the clunis.
-
As a personal testimony, the UNRV map is completely awesome. I usually keep it on the wall beside my bed so I can have epic dreams at night.
-
I love the variety of options in this quiz.
May #1 is: Claudius
My #2 is: Iulius Caesar
My #3 is: Livius
My #4 is: Marcus Aurelius
My #5 is: Plotinus
My #6 is: Cato Maior
Guess this means I'm misunderstood and underestimated. What an opportunity to live!
-
I just received a late present: a "Graphic Non Fiction Novel: Julius Caesar- The Life of a Roman General". It amuses me greatly!
http://www.amazon.com/Julius-Caesar-Genera...491&sr=1-13
A Latin phrase-a-day calendar also makes my day very happy every morning.
-
I studied Latin four years in high school.
My teachers were wonderful, dedicated.
But the lack of any background on spoken
Latin left me with the false impression
that all Romans spoke like Cicero.
What an unfortunate life that would have been! It would take an hour just to ask how the weather has been lately in Umbria!
One day Gaius decided that he wanted to hear Cicero give a speech in the forum. So he tells his wife who packs him a small lunch and off he sets early in the morning. Gaius is gone all day and when he finally arrived home that night his wife asks him how Cicero's speech went.
"Well," he said, "he is as fine an orator as they say."
"What did he speak about?" Gaius' wife asks.
"I don't know." Gaius responds. "I didn't stay long enough to hear the verb."
-
What a hard, hard life.
-
"I said, 'Do you know anything about history?'" he said. "He said no. And I said, 'Good, g-ddamn it, because I don't care about it.'"
Oh, THAT'S a great approach to making a historically based series. You can't bend history if you don't know what you're bending.
-
Was there also a taboo about senators being a part of the publicani? I'll admit, it's hardly the most reliable source, but somewhere in Colleen McCullough's "Master of Rome" series, she has the character of M.Brutus getting into some trouble trying to keep his tax operation in Asia under the table while heavily exploiting the people there.
-
The usage of "Clodius" as opposed to "Claudius" was still a matter of preference and family custom, and not necessarily indicative of social standing.
Very interesting. Another point made by the author of Clodius is that Cicero never says 'boo' about the issue -- and he was certainly eager to invent any outrage in the world to lay at Clodius' feet (though, I suppose, Clodia may have been crowding that particular space).
She certainly did do her brother a favour in that area!
I also found this point that Tatum makes interesting, in discrediting the commonly accepted claim of Clodius' name change:
"...popularitas was not won by politicians who eliminated the social distance between themselves and the plebs urbana....the mob valued nobility."
And yet Cicero is quoted as giving this very reason, to win favour with the plebs, as Clodius' motivation (the politician, 46). Then again, what would Cicero know about the thought process of this young fellow who had been relatively unknown to Cicero, as compared to later in life, when he first began politics and was known as Clodius even then. This contradicts, as Cato pointed out above, Cicero's silence on the matter later on.
I think this paragraph in Tatum pretty much sums up the problem in my mind: "The pronunciation of o for original au was, by the first century of our era, so common that au-forms could be treated as pedantic. The situation was not quite the same in Publius' day, but o-forms of certain nouns were used colloquially by Cicero. It may well be that the use of Clodius and Clodia by Publius and his sisters (if not also by Gaius) was one manifestation of contemporary fashion among their stylish circle."
Tatum continues this thought further on pg. 248 with the urban diction becoming rather in vogue during the 50's based on Catullus' poetry being the guide for popular and trendy.
-
..the infamous Patrician tribune of the plebs...
Infamous in what way?
You might remember that he organize gangs that fought in the street and terrorize political enemies and that after his death his supporters burn down the Senate house!
In short, in the late Republic, the age anarchy and demagogues, Clodius is the worst example of them both.
Or maybe the best example. Despite the...burst of life...he inserted into politics during the Late Republic, much of what he did, played to the common person's pleasure of immediate gratification and belief that there was someone in the senate who made their life more interesting and granted them a place to use their collective influence. The commoner was an untapped source of power and that is what made him both infamous, to some, and a hero, or at least a tool to be tamed- if that were ever possible, for others.
I think we tend to remember Clodius as infamous thanks to Cicero's opinion of the man.
-
So the use of "Clodius" vs. "Claudius" was indeed in wide spread practice long before P. Clodius...that is fascinating. The pronunciation difference that M
-
"Clodianus" shows that Cornelius Lentulus was adopted into the "Clodii" gens....I believe you may have that the wrong way around -- that would have been a Claudius/Clodius adopted into the family of the Cornelii Lentuli.
Oh, you are right. I remember now.
Since there does seem to be another Clodius, and saying that he changed his name rather than being born with it, what would be his motivation to change his name? Certainly it was far below most all Claudians to be so closely associated with the lowly commoners.Again, I believe it's just a name variation, and a matter of preference. M -
Thanks for the info everyone! My driving curiosity won't eat me alive anymore.
For C. Cato's relationships with all the other Catoni, see my Kinsmen of Cato stemma.This is a fascinating tree! Visuals are so great to study, thanks for sharing!
-
It seems that I have been taught slightly amiss, without ill intent no doubt. I had been taught that P. Clodius changed his name "Claudius" to the now famous nick-name, so to speak though it is indeed no cognomen or agnomen, from the way the plebs would pronounce "Claudius" with their accent. This, of course, makes Clodius look more friendly towards the people he is winning into his services and like his sister Clodia, makes their name wholly, entirely and without exception unique. You can say "Clodius" and you know exactly who is being talked about, unlike the less fortunate man with the name "Metellus" or some such.
Recently, this simple fact has been called into question slightly with a fellow by the name of C. Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus. I came across Clodianus in the early-midish first century BC, specifically in reference to his consulship in 72 BC. Along with his fellow consul L. Gellius Publicola they passed a law ratifying Pompeius' and Metellus Pius' grants of citizenship to some of the Spanish fellows they had come across in the Sertorian war. The point of this is that, so long as I am remembering my Republican naming system correctly, "Clodianus" shows that Cornelius Lentulus was adopted into the "Clodii" gens....
Forgive my ignorance, but was there indeed a "Clodii" gens or was there another Claudius who altered his name to Clodius? If this is so, was this a naming trend within a specific branch of the Claudii? Maybe just something P. Clodius picked up thinking it was a cool idea and therein made famous? Since there does seem to be another Clodius, and saying that he changed his name rather than being born with it, what would be his motivation to change his name? Certainly it was far below most all Claudians to be so closely associated with the lowly commoners. -
- It is okay to use the word "Emperor" and "King" interchangably.
Funny that you mention this, in the ancient Jewish sources the Roman emperor is often called a "King". It's seem that some of the people which lived under the empire rule were also confused on this subject.
I also believe the Greeks referred to Roman emperors as Basileus, which means king or sovereign.
This king=emperor thing may be true from point of view of other cultures who had long histories under kings and even some very positive experiences at that....Greece being more subjective with their independent city-states, but Romans hated kings. I am not familiar enough with the later Empire to speak for it, but at least in the earlier Empire it was certainly not a good thing to be called a king! From the point of view of Romans, this interchangeability is not cool. Then again, I don't recall any emperor exactly rebuking any non-Roman for calling them king. Maybe it all comes down to giving allowance for other cultures and a double standard where one thing is not acceptable in Rome but is outside?
- Julius Caesar was the first Emperor of Rome.
While Caesar wasn't a Princeps some ancient authors like Suetonius saw his as the founder the imperial power in Rome.
Founder, perhaps yes, and I can agree well enough. There is a distinct but subtle enough line dividing Caesar's position with what could be considered the role of an emperor, a line which remains irrevocably important. Or at least in my mind. I suppose I've created a small pet peeve about it.
You are correct of course, my point is that most books are refer to Rome from a very "legal" and "official" point of view that was could be understand by the Roman aristocracy but probably wasn't shared by the masses who lived under Roman rule.
Ah, yes. Very true. And that is one thing that can be so difficult about studying and writing about a society and transcends so many other cultures: encompassing all thoughts and ideas. And with that, thanks for bringing up those points.
-
Any student sponsorship programs available?
-
As I read deeper into the exciting happenings of the 60-40's B.C. there is a new name that has arisen to my attention: Gaius Cato. I read of him in connection with the more dubious dealings of the popularis, in the circles of Clodius and Crassus but it looks like he was not able to strongly establish himself as a Clodius or Curio but was more of a secondary level demagogue.
So I ask who is this C. Cato I read of, who is his family, what happened to him? Was he a demagogue or just another adulescens looking for some political excitement before he settled down?
I am really taken with the development and role of demagogues in the Late Republic so I am eager to know about this "new" layer.
-
I am actually in the middle of reading Seager's biography and while it is a good read and interesting I find that it tends to glaze over Pompey's life without getting into the exciting messy details and alliances that make his life and interactions so thrilling.
One book I would suggest, though does not deal directly with Pompey's politics and so would require some page flipping on your side, is David Stockton's "Cicero: A Political Biography". An excellent read on any account but Stockton does spend some good time with Cicero and Pompey's friendship which reflects directly into the political realm.
-
Girls always wanna have fun....
That lyre kind of sounds like stretched elastic bands. lol Thanks for sharing though, it was good to hear.
-
- It is okay to use the word "Emperor" and "King" interchangably.
Funny that you mention this, in the ancient Jewish sources the Roman emperor is often called a "King". It's seem that some of the people which lived under the empire rule were also confused on this subject.
I also believe the Greeks referred to Roman emperors as Basileus, which means king or sovereign.
This king=emperor thing may be true from point of view of other cultures who had long histories under kings and even some very positive experiences at that....Greece being more subjective with their independent city-states, but Romans hated kings. I am not familiar enough with the later Empire to speak for it, but at least in the earlier Empire it was certainly not a good thing to be called a king! From the point of view of Romans, this interchangeability is not cool. Then again, I don't recall any emperor exactly rebuking any non-Roman for calling them king. Maybe it all comes down to giving allowance for other cultures and a double standard where one thing is not acceptable in Rome but is outside?
- Julius Caesar was the first Emperor of Rome.While Caesar wasn't a Princeps some ancient authors like Suetonius saw his as the founder the imperial power in Rome.
Founder, perhaps yes, and I can agree well enough. There is a distinct but subtle enough line dividing Caesar's position with what could be considered the role of an emperor, a line which remains irrevocably important. Or at least in my mind. I suppose I've created a small pet peeve about it.
-
The Greeks used to bind the left arms of their male babies to ensure the development of right-handedness and so their ability to join the ranks of the phalanx. Is there any evidence of this type of behaviour in Rome?
I have read some analogous commentaries on the Romans, but I haven't been able so far to find any Classical source for such statements.
In fact, can you provide us your source(s) on your previous statement about the Greeks?
Lecture notes only.
Pick the Caption
in Hora Postilla Thermae
Posted
LOL!!
"Just a second Gaius, I need to plant these pumpkins on Farmville before it's too late."