Roman Conception of Republicanism

[Queequeg]

WTF dude, HBO's Rome is great

There's a lot done well and a few things done very poorly.

still great. Show me a better historical-ish TV series.

Deadwood.

[AnchorClanker]

WTF dude, HBO's Rome is great

There's a lot done well and a few things done very poorly.

still great. Show me a better historical-ish TV series.

I, Claudius.

[Caliga]

I, Claudius.

+1

[AnchorClanker]

George Baker's Tiberius is great 

[MadImmortalMan]

Patrick Stewart with hair.   



Obviously, the one who makes the whole thing is Brian Blessed.

[MadImmortalMan]

We like the word democracy today due to it's positive connotations but at the time it was seen as a mobocracy ready to self destruct at the first sign of an alcibiaides or an adolf hitler.

Maybe they were smarter than we are. Toss in some adversity and you never know what the electorate will turn to. Look at Greece today.

[Viking]

We like the word democracy today due to it's positive connotations but at the time it was seen as a mobocracy ready to self destruct at the first sign of an alcibiabaides or an adolf hitler.

Maybe they were smarter than we are. Toss in some adversity and you never know what the electorate will turn to. Look at Greece today.

Or look at California and it's voted propositions biding the hands of politicians for mobocracy in a more civilized manner. I'd also like to point out that rome did have it's problems with Alcibiades types from Graccus to Marius to Caesar to Augustus.

"The Public Thing" certainly didn't render the romans immune, they probably thought it did thou.

[The Minsky Moment]

The Roman Republic was around for 400-500 years and changed quite a bit over time, so I don't think one can meaningfully speak about a unitary concept of Republicanism.  Indeed even at a particular time, the understanding of what republicanism meant was highly contested.

One thing I definitely agree with Viking about is that most Romans would not see Athens as a model; more like a cautionary tale of the dangers of democracy.

[Valmy]

The Roman Republic was around for 400-500 years and changed quite a bit over time, so I don't think one can meaningfully speak about a unitary concept of Republicanism.  Indeed even at a particular time, the understanding of what republicanism meant was highly contested.

One thing I definitely agree with Viking about is that most Romans would not see Athens as a model; more like a cautionary tale of the dangers of democracy.

I think the Romans most definitely thought their system was far superior to the Athenians.  I think they felt like they were trying to do the same thing, just that the Romans succeeded and the Athenians failed.  I do not agree that the felt they had nothing in common with what was going on in Athens.  Again if they did not feel thay way why pick the year before Athens' Democracy as the date of the Republic's legendary founding?  That was done for a reason.

[Viking]

The Roman Republic was around for 400-500 years and changed quite a bit over time, so I don't think one can meaningfully speak about a unitary concept of Republicanism.  Indeed even at a particular time, the understanding of what republicanism meant was highly contested.

One thing I definitely agree with Viking about is that most Romans would not see Athens as a model; more like a cautionary tale of the dangers of democracy.

I think the Romans most definitely thought their system was far superior to the Athenians.  I think they felt like they were trying to do the same thing, just that the Romans succeeded and the Athenians failed.  I do not agree that the felt they had nothing in common with what was going on in Athens.  Again if they did not feel thay way why pick the year before Athens' Democracy as the date of the Republic's legendary founding?  That was done for a reason.

No, thats because the romans thought that old = good so the roman republic was one year older than the athenian democracy and thus better.

[Valmy]

No, thats because the romans thought that old = good so the roman republic was one year older than the athenian democracy and thus better.

So it was just a total coincidence they just happen to pick the Athenenian Democracy?  Please.  They could have made it one year older than all sorts of things.

[Agelastus]

Which of the first two treaties with Carthage did Polybius see (referring to it as being inscribed in bronze tablets and containing archaic and difficult to understand Latin IIRC)? The first or the second?

If it was the first, which Polybius dated to 508 and Varro to 509BC, then it's actually possible that the date has nothing to do with Athens at all - that it is, in fact, as close an approximation of the actual date that the Romans could come up with because they had actual documents from the period.

Of course, this makes Polybius agree with Varro and not Livy, and both Polybius and Varro can be said to have had agendas (Polybius pro-Roman and Varro pro-Caesarian) so they might both be lying deliberately. On the other hand Polybius is unlikely given the detail to have been lying about the Treaty he has seen. Still, given their agendas it may have had something to do with Athens.

On the other hand, it may have been a simple mistake on Varro's part reinforced by his own reading of Polybius (he seems to have accounted for a four year discrepancy in the records twice in two different ways.) I found this article on the chronology problems with the early republic very interesting - Varronian Chronology

[derspiess]

Would it be appropriate to discuss the Republican conception of Romanism here, or should I start a new thread?

[Queequeg]

Would it be appropriate to discuss the Republican conception of Romanism here, or should I start a new thread?

It would seem extremely appropriate. I find it interesting that the name most associated with the birth of the Principate-Caesar-is consciously of Spanish origin. Caesar abandoned his old-Roman Patrician roots for a non-Latin name. Surely related? I think men like Cassius and Brutus, Xenophobia and hostility to subjected peoples was a healthy Roman attitude.

[Valmy]

It would seem extremely appropriate. I find it interesting that the name most associated with the birth of the Principate-Caesar-is consciously of Spanish origin. Caesar abandoned his old-Roman Patrician roots for a non-Latin name. Surely related? I think men like Cassius and Brutus, Xenophobia and hostility to subjected peoples was a healthy Roman attitude.

Caesar?  He had a roman name, it was Julius.  Caesar was not a name he adopted anyway it was used at least as far back as his Grandfather and it was just the cognomen of that branch of the Julian clan.  I thought it was Gallic in origin though, but I do not think they meant anything anti-Roman about it.