Just gonna throw this out here but it’s been mulling over my brain hypothetically speaking we could have gotten Majorian as Emperor in 455, after Valentinian III gets assassinated everyone kinda at least from what I’ve seen ignores that Majorian was considered a candidate with the support of both the army and the widowed Empress sure that’s only around 2 years earlier but a lot happened within those two years. Petronius fucking up everything and pissing off the Vandals leading to the sack and his death leaving a succession crisis Avitus struggling to maintain stability, the Visigoths effectively taking most of Hispania and even more chaos. Given how well regarded and romanticized Majorian is I’m surprised to not really see this as a more discussed hypothetical even in a minor sense for potential butterfly effects. Although arguably one could say Majorian still gets killed by Ricimer if not earlier point is it’s a hypothetical of interest to me.

Let's say I was some able-bodied, 23 year old male from a Germanic tribe near Rome's borders. Time period, around the height of it's imperial power.

One day, I suddenly become a huuuuge Romeaboo and want to become a Roman citizen. Is this doable or will the nearest guard put a spear in my chest?

like how did people react? how was he honored? what changed in society?

Livia Drusilla died peacefully
Orestilla was exiled by Emperor Caligula
Lollia Paulina was executed on charges of practicing black magic, accused by Agrippina the Younger
Milonia Caesonia was executed alongside Emperor Caligula by soldiers
Valeria Messalina was ordered to be executed by Emperor Claudius
Agrippina the Younger was ordered to be executed by Emperor Nero
Claudia Octavia was ordered to be executed by Emperor Nero
Poppaea Sabina died during childbirth or was possibly struck to death by Emperor Nero
Statilia Messalina's fate is unknown
Sporus committed suicide

Galeria Fundana died peacefully
Domitia Longina died peacefully
Pompeia Plotina died peacefully
Vibia Sabina died peacefully
Faustina the Elder died peacefully
Faustina the Younger died peacefully
Lucilla was ordered to be executed by Emperor Commodus
Bruttia Crispina was ordered to be executed by Emperor Commodus
Flavia Titiana died peacefully
Manlia Scantilla died peacefully
Julia Domna committed suicide
Fulvia Plautilla was ordered to be executed by Emperor Caracalla
Nonia Celsa may be fictional
Julia Cornelia Paula died peacefully
Julia Aquilia Severa died peacefully
Annia Faustina died peacefully
Sallustia Orbiana was exiled by Emperor Alexander

Even in ancient times you had the "kings general" or something like that, but it just occurred to me that, whenever Rome needed to handle something big, they had to go to each general personally, and even then, when they are all on the battlefield, its many armies and not one army. that obviously worked for the romans, but it seems like a very odd way to run a military.

I know this is an odd thing to ask. I have been looking for a replica Roman ring. Most are either on shady sites that seem inauthentic or on museum shops. I have no problem with museum shops but they’re all women’s and too small for me. I am not particular about period I just want something that looks real. Any help is really appreciated. Thank you

I know he gave a speech during the Nika riots, I know he was instrumental in Justin getting elevated. But did the guy ever really go anywhere else in the city but the palace?

Hello everyone, I just thought about Pompey's nickname and found it really cool. I read Tom Holland's Rubicon last year and usually listen to podcasts, I don't remember any other nickname other than Sulla naming himself Felix. I'm not referring to physical names like strabo or pilosus but ones given for the person's attitudes or life. thank you and excuse my poor english :)

From what I understand cognomens could be either appointed or inherited.

If appointed, I don't understand why powerful senators in republican rome would consent to being called "Chick pea", "the hairy" or "born feet first". (My favourite is Vespillo, ie. "Person employed to bury people too poor for a funeral")

If inherited, could they not change the cognomen seeing as the trait it refers to would most likely not be applicable anymore?

Personally really like him

Just start reading Roman republic book by Mike Duncan call “The storm before The storm” and I feel that it’s very hypocritical for the Romans people to be ok with the patricians while holding hatred for a concept of a king. This confuse me more when Marius get to be consul multiple time but do nothing regard this matter even after seeing Sulla rises to power faster than he did just because he was born into a better family. Am I missing something here or is there an invincible tension that will be break in the future?

I'm looking for video games that are based on ancient rome. Some less obvious ones would be nice (I know about total war rome, imperator rome, ryse son of rome, age of decadence). Even if said game has only a faction inspired by ancient rome that would be fine or if its lore is inspired by ancient rome ( I heard elder scrolls lore is but don't know about that).

I see here so many secondary content, for example, paintings by 19th century British and French artists, stills from Gladiator and other such films.

But in the past I've gotten striked for posting a painting of Vespasian by Alma-Tadema among other things.

I see posts about modern fiction like Gladiator, Those About to Die, Ben Hur, Plebs, among other things. All contemporary secondary content.

For example, is this 1550 etching of Tarquin and Lucretia ok?

https://preview.redd.it/kw1jld4xt86e1.png?width=2560&format=png&auto=webp&s=b02688efadf75204543bf9f945494138f0a9b0af

Or what about a photograph from a Globe production of Antony & Cleopatra?

Im really struggling to understand what is permissible here and what is not in terms of secondary content.

Italic (to which Latin belongs) and Celtic are two branches of the Indo-European language family, and some specialists in Indo-European believe they're especially closely related to each other.

Surviving attestations of Gaulish and other continental Celtic languages show a lot of similarities to Latin, especially in grammar (for example, three genders in -os/-a/-on (which is also similar to Greek), verb endings and verb conjugation structure, numerals, pronouns, etc.) and a good amount of basic vocabulary.

Given all this, do we have any records of Romans noticing "huh, Gaulish/Celtic looks a lot like Latin, wonder why that is"? If there is, how did they explain the similarities - was it like the Latin-Greek relationship, where some Romans believed Latin was just a divergent form of archaic Greek brought to Italy by Aeneas?

I read the Wikipedia article, asked ChatGPT/Gemini, and I still cannot wrap my head around why this was such a massive fucking deal that permeated pretty much all levels of the empire? Maybe because I was raised secularly, and I guess I understand the theological questions raised on a very macro, superficial level, but can someone kindly please explain why it was like a 10/10 crisis and not some minor issue that could have been resolved quickly or just dissipated on its own eventually?

Edit: Literally every reply was insightful and helpful, thank you!

All the modern sources that I had read until recently argued that he couldn't have been a slave because there was no mention of him being one in the original sources and, more importantly, because there is no way Romans would worship an (ex) slave. I'm reading Mary Beard's Emperor of Rome now and she refers to Antinous repeatedly as a slave. So does Carline Vout (albeit more cautiously) in some of her essays. Does anyone know if this is plausible? It would be a straightforward answer to how he met Hadrian but I remember his family was briefly mentioned in the Obelisk which wouldn't have happened even if he a freedman right? Any input is appreciated.

Does anyone have any interesting/funny/clever router names that are hopefully Roman (or at least antiquity) themed?

Don't know where to post and was wondering since I couldn't find any during my searches. I don't know if this runs afoul of the rules (apologies if it does), but was wondering what fellow citizens might have to offer.

I cant seem to wrap my brain around this guy. How was he able to outwit and defeat seasoned military men/leaders with much, much more experience than he had? I mean, did Caesar impart some super secret military wisdom to him in the little bit of time they spent together?? Where did his expertise in naval warfare come from? What were his tactics in battle compared to normal Roman military tactics of the time? Was he just one of those rare and brilliant people that come along every now and then that are much smarter and more innovative than everyone else?

It just feels so rare in history to get 2 geniuses (Octavian a political genius, Agrippa a military genius) like him and Octavian who are born in the exact same year (63 BC) & in the same place, just so happen to find one another when they are young and become best friends, stay steadfastly loyal to each other for the rest of their lives no matter what, and thencomplement each other's strengths/weaknesses so unbelievably well that they go on to completely take over/modify/reshape a civilization like the Republic that had hundreds of years of institutional customs/traditions, and become 2 of the most powerful men in history, side by side. It is such an anomaly, this situation.

So we all remember Ammianus Marcellinus, a traditional Roman writer during the age of the Valentinians. He tells us this

Some foreigners who will perhaps read this work (if I shall be so fortunate) may wonder why it is when the narrative turns to the description of what goes on at Rome, I tell of nothing save dissensions, taverns, and other similar vulgarities.

He also describes that during the rule of Memmius Orfitus, the mayor of Rome, this occurred

During his term of office serious riots broke out because of the scarcity of wine; for the people, eager for an unrestrained use of this commodity, are roused to frequent and violent disturbances.

I mean this seriously feels like a giant town of hooligans and embezzlers.

when the arrest of the charioteer Philoromus was ordered, all the commons followed, as if to defend their own darling, and with a formidable onslaught set upon the governor

Another common thing is just the insane amount of scams and false accusations that take place. Folks hiring hitmen, others who falsely accuse a fellow citizen of "incantations" or "forbidden magic" (Book 28)

And another one is the fact that he mentions that you can't even go to the forums without running into this crowd who is obsessed with 'dicing and wining'

And he also talks about the rich Romans as well, which he says only care about stuffing themselves with dainty food and how all the libraries are tombs.

I will be honest, I find this really sad, there is more that he says, both in book 28 and book 14 that really makes you have contempt for the city during this time period.

Seen the videos of civilis so many times. So much AI trash now

Augustus effectively created a military dictatorship and as we’ve seen in the 20th and 21st centuries, those tend to be fairly unstable except during periods of particularly strong (and brutal) rulers.

Could Augustus have reformed the republic to create a more stable and prosperous system with the information he had available to him at the time? It seems to me that Rome had some serious underlying tension that was never really resolved by Augustus and that came to a head in the 3rd century.

But, is it even fair to say that one man should be responsible for setting up a political system to last for centuries?

I’ve read several books on Rome.

The most popular recommendations being SPQR by Mary Beard and Rubicon by Tom Holland. In addition to that I’ve read the fall of the Roman Empire by Peter Heather and Emperors of Rome by Mary Beard.

These are usually the popular suggestions when it comes to Rome.

But I’m looking for something a bit more academic. Don’t care if it’s dry, I live for historical books that are filled with more details and information at the expense of entertaining prose haha.

Don’t know if you all read other historical periods, I like to jump around often. Earlier this year I read Alexander to Actium by Peter Greene, and right now I’m reading From Cyrus to Alexander by Pierre Brant.

If you’re familiar with these books, they’re basically massive tombs that go into great detail about every aspect of the Hellenistic Period and the Persian Empire, respectively.

And well I want to find a book that’s more akin to that, but for Rome. Whether it’s the Republic, Empire, or both. Of course, if there is such a book that’s exists!

Thanks in advance !

Does anyone have any historically accurate pictures or descriptions of the oracles? I have to make a costume for a competition but I’m having trouble funding a good example of what they wore, anything helps!