Talk:Consul
From Academic Kids
Putting a list of all of the Roman Consuls at the end of this article is a Bad Idea. This list must needs be placed in its own article. I've been meaning to do this, but lack of time (I've been caught up in a nasty fight over another website I contribute to) & my desired goal of having a complete list from 508 BC to at least AD 500 requires a lot more research than I am able to do right now, both have kept me from providing the necessary article. So I've reverted to an older article.
However, the content in the Consul list here needs preserving, so I'm leaving this article complete until I can migrate enough of the content to allow me to delete this redundant 80% -- & make a far shorter article. The problem here is not a need for more material: it's that we have a valuable contribution that needs some migration into a more wieldly format. Please bear with me while I make this happen. -- llywrch 03:01 Jan 13, 2003 (UTC)
Because the complete consul list would be extrememly long (Wikipedia sends up a warning whenever an article is over 32Kb), I've split the list into three parts -- Republican, Early Imperial & Late Imperial. I hope I've split the list in the right places & did not introduce too many errors in the compilation. -- llywrch 00:48 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)
(Copied from my talk page:)
- For everybody's info -- The best source (and most authoritative still) for who Romans are and what offices they held is the Prosopographia Imperii Romani (ed. Mommsen et al. IIRC). This should really be the final arbiter, unless there is a more recent and well-argued scholarly source. JHK 17:27 7 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Patricians and plebeians
Reading through Encyclopaedia Britannica's article on Ancient Rome (2003 edition), the authors question the traditional notion of the early Republic's political history as being a gradual struggle for the plebeians to attain equality with the patricians. Specifically to this article, it mentions that about 30 per cent of the consuls prior to 366BC had plebeian names.
Unfortunately the article isn't annotated so I can't tell exactly what their source is; but the most likely sources from the bibliography for the early Republic would appear to be
- E. Stuart Staveley, "Forschungsbericht: The Constitution of the Roman Republic 1940-1954", Historia, 5:74-122 (1956)
- E. Stuart Staveley, "The Nature and Aims of the Patriciate", Historia, 32:24-57 (1983)
- Kurt A. Raaflaub (ed.), Social Struggles in Archaic Rome: New Perspectives on the Conflict of the Orders (1986)
- Richard E. Mitchell, Patricians and Plebeians: The Origin of the Roman State (1990)
Anyone have any perspective on this, or know scholarship's current opinion on the traditional story of class struggle?Binabik80 02:14, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Try plebs and Conflict of the Orders. Mitchell's book is pretty much current, growing out of the conference proceedings mentioned at "Conflict". Tim Cornell's book on early Rome is good too, didn't get much chance to sift it into WP before it had to go back to the library, need to get it out again. Stan 13:19, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Okay then, I'm going to add a note to that effect in the article.Binabik80 15:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
