Nero

[The Augusta]

What I mean is that the plebs were politically superior than the Senate.

But this doesn't make any sense either. Plebeians and senators were not mutually exclusive groups. In fact, most senators WERE plebeians. What do you think a plebeian is?

 

 

Senators always came from the aristocracy with the exception of Cicero. Plebeians were of the lower class, the mob. When the mob was angry, havoc struck.

 

Senators came from those who were wealthy. The aristocracy is a mis-applied term because membership of the senate was on the basis of how much cash you had, not who your father was, although I accept that people being people a senators son got preferential consideration, itself something very roman.

 

Whether or not the origin of a family was plebian is immaterial. What mattered was which social class you belonged to. You were either senatorial or not. Notice how much scorn is poured on Octavian for his families humble origins. I really do not believe that a roman senator regarded himself as a pleb.

 

Another excellent point that helps to illustrate further our usage of such terms in our present century. Aristocracy to us is synonymous with hereditary powers, wealth etc. but in the ancient world, using the term as the Greeks used it, it meant 'rule by the best men' - which to my simple way of thinking does not necessarily imply a hereditary concept. Let's face it, how did any mediaeval family become 'aristocratic'? Through wealth and the acquisition of land in the first place.

 

But Caldrail is quite right, which is why in scholarly texts, such men are referred to as boni or some other purely Latin term taken from the context of the era. Sometimes, using our modern terminology does nothing to enlighten matters.

Edited October 15, 2007 by The Augusta