Triumph

[pompeius magnus]

This is just a thought I had the other day and thought I would get some other opinions. The Triumph was an Etruscan invention borowwed by the Romans. Did it have an impact in the fall of the republic with generals doing almost anything to get one, or was it just for show.

[Primus Pilus]

An interesting concept. The triumph was a terrible point of contention on many occassions between the two major political factions. While I don't necessarily think it is a cause, it certainly is a major symptom of the problems of that era.

 

As an example, while Caesar certainly wanted his first triumph (after his victories in Hispania), he wanted the Consulship even more. Both are indications of his personal desire for power and dignity, but the consulship was a means to continuing advancement while the triumph really only provided a brief moment of glory.

 

This of course is only one brief example, and the theory obviously needs some further thought.

[Lacertus]

Only very worthy victory might give the right for a triumph. But how might the worth of victory be assessed? It

[Germanicus]

I think squabbles over who got a triumph were symtomatic of the fall of the republic, but didn't cause it directly. Sulla squabbled with Marius, Caesar with the Senate, etc etc. After the Empire came into being, there were no squabbles, because the only person who could celebrate a triumph was the Emperor. Germanicus was the last non Emperor to celebrate one, granted by Tiberius.