Excellent video.. very informative.. I have read a large number of Roman authors, and tried to divine the structure of the Republic, but was unable.. You have cleared up so much... Thank you!
The word "corn" have different meaning in British and American English. In British English, “corn” is a general word used for any plant that is grown for its grain/seeds to produce flour, such as wheat, barley, maize and oats. In American English the word “corn” refers to the seeds of the maize plant, or the plant itself.
+christosvoskresye You make an excellent point! Their role in helping navigate the tensions between patrician and plebeian interests in the 5th century BCE, and drawing up important laws, did indeed play an important role in the formation of the Republic.Thank you for pointing that out.
Quite right, after all they came up with the twelve tables and this particular law which I wish to bring to attention 'Table XI, Law I. Affairs of great importance shall not be transacted without the vote of the people, with whom rests the power to appoint magistrates, to condemn citizens, and to enact laws.'
The Praetor Urbis acted as the governor of Rome in absence of the Consuls . He could summon the Senate, enroll an army. He had judicial power in Rome in trials.
I need to say that centuries weren't composed of 100 soldiers. Centuries were composed of 10 contubernium with each composed of 8 legionaries and 2 helpers/slaves. So centuries were in fact composed of 100 men but only 80 of them were soldiers.
What you say is true only for the centuries as military units and only after the Marian reform of 107 BC. It is not true before and would never be true for the comitia centuriata (the assembly of centuries) which was an elective body (the 193 cited in the video). And even in the military context, the first cohort of a legion would have five double-sized centuries (160 fighting men) , compared to the 6 normal sized centuries of the other 9 cohorts that formed a legion. And this military organization will change often later, during the Imperial time.
PyroLegends she didn't say 100 soldiers, sir. She clearly mention that each Centuries was composed of 100 men which is correct (80 soldiers and 20 support personnel).
Once again, you mix two different concepts which had the same name but which had very little to do with each other. THE CENTURY WAS NOT A MILITARY UNIT ... at least for more than 80% of the history of the Roman Republic. From 509 BCE to 107 BCE, so during 402 years, the smallest military units were at first phallanxes, like the Etruscans who copied from the Greeks, and then the maniple (manipulus in latin) after around 315 BCE. During that period, there were no military unit called a century. Only in 107 BCE, 80 years before the end of the Rebublic, a military unit called the centuria in latin was created by Marius. It is a part of the Marian reforms who completely changed the organisation of the army and the recruting of soldiers. It is the birth of the professionnal army, as opposed to an army of the citizens. The video, quite rightly, speaks of the centuries as a way to organize the voting rights of people and they were originally composed of 100 citizens in the begining of the Republic hence the word centuria (it was also used as a mean to count people and even to levy taxes). The number of citizens in each of these "civilian" centuries would change over time but the name would stick. But it as very little to do with the army except that each century, before the Marian reform, was to provide a certain number of soldiers, which were not 100 at all but greatly depended on the wealth of the people.
No you missed the point. The Centuriata weren't necessary roman legionnaries, but citizens of arms bearing age, and she's actually talking about the middle and late republican system when the armies composed largely of militia, or consription, and the allied Italic militia. But anyroad what she's refering to is that the Centuriatas were kinda like voting blocks within the city, not actual Legion centuries. Not every arms bearing man was all the time in the Legion, because they had their own jobs, like farming and masonry, and what not.
Quick question: you mentioned why there were only 24 tribune, but I think I missed why that was? 15:08 --- just realized this is 10 years old -- but excellent video regardless!
Great question, and thanks for your viewership! In early Roman history, six military tribunes were usually appointed to each legion, and four legions formed the Roman army. Of course, the total number of legions at any one time fluctuated throughout Roman history, depending on whom the Romans were fighting against and how many legions needed to be raised. We're working on a next video, so stay tuned!
its probably because she's only made 12 videos in about 4 or 5 years. UA-cam tends to favor channels that produce more content on a regular basis which is why "Let's Play" channels do so well, the make videos 2 or 3 times or more a week. There's alot more that goes into their algorithms but that's part of it. UA-cam's algorithms are dumb though, they tend to favor quantity over quality by a wide margin.
7:21 Thank you for that information!11:40 Yes, though there are obviously major differences between the modern US electoral system and the ancient Roman one (nuances we regret not having time to explore further in this series).
It was pronounced Lawinia. They didn't speak Ecclesiastical Latin until 500 years after Rome's fall. The eastern half didn't even speak Ecclesiastical Latin, they spoke Greek
help me: after military service, them a SENATOR could run for any public office, in general starting as Quaestor... right? I mean, be a senator was a precondition to hold punlic office after elected, is that correct? 14:06
Minor detail but you didn't HAVE to serve as aedile to become praetor. You could go straight to praetor if you were old enough. Many just liked serving in it though due to the age gap and popularity to be gained.
Also, note that the axes weren't always in the fasces. They were put in under certain circumstamces. Still like the video though, pretty good overal overview.
Read Colleen McCullough, First Man of Rome collection. It is fictional history but very real. Also Polybius on Rome and Anacyclosis. It is the only thing missing on the video: meaning. It will help understand the US system and its problems.
Thank you for your feedback! Wherever possible, we have attempted to use Classical Latin pronunciation based on current North American and British textbooks, which, indeed, may vary from region to region. The subject of proper ancient Greek and Latin pronunciations is certainly worth investigating!
@@clemenstresunusquattuor6626 yes it's certainly not a simple thing to make judgements on the pronunciation of words which were only in true use 2000 years ago
An excellent point! Thanks for catching that.We tried to keep things simple for this nutshell version, but you are correct. Pontifs and proconsuls (especially as Rome's territory expanded) did play important roles in Rome's government and its history. Thanks!
In fact the centurate comitiiae were not that powerfull. Many new elected consuls or praetors were fired by the tribune of the plebs with their power of appeal to the people ( the all tribes)
The whole video overstates the importanc of ethnicity. That the three original tribus were based on ethnicity is highly questionable. Also, (Tarquinius) Collatinus was just as much a Latin as his cousin Sextus Tarquinius. Also just as much as a Etruscan. Actually, both were born-and-bred Romans, belonging to the same family. Yes, the first Tarquinius was born among the Etruscans but he left because, being half-Greek, had no prospects of a career there...
I wouldn't refer to the numerous tribes and peoples of Italia as different "races" in the way we see race today as they clearly weren't. More accurately they were a collection of different ethnic, cultural and linguistic groups who shared a similar migration history as well as the same DNA.
You make an excellent point. The Latin word 'gens' has often in the past been translated as "race" (see Lewis & Short's Latin dictionary) and been used in Classical scholarship, for example when referring to different Italic tribes and groups. We will work on updating this terminology in the future, as the field of Classical studies also continues to change. Thank you for your comment.
1:35 Romulus: Hey, let's build on this hill for military defense. Remus: No, let's build on this one for trade. *Romulus digs trench* Remus: Hey, your trench is dumb! Romulus: Yeah, well, your hill is dumber! *Remus and Romulus fight* *Remus dies*
Thank you! We weren't able to go into nuanced detail in this video, so may have missed a number of things. We will, nevertheless, be sure to check out the resource you have recommended. Thanks!
Corn? Are you serious? The roman's went all the way to the new world and got corn from the aztecs and incas there and brought it over???? Do your research!
As pointed out in the comments, UK English uses "corn" for American English "grain". There is no need to rude. Also, you should have done your research, or at least, stage one, read the comments.
Do not speak about "races" if you want to be taken seriously as a scientific commenter. The only exclusion to that is when we speak about "race" as a social construct of colonial history
Great video thanks! I just wanted to point out the corn dole was impossible. It could not be corn, it was grain. Corn was brought to Europe from the old world (think maize). Corn, tomatoes, tobacco, potatoes and chili peppers all did not exist in Europe until the 16th century. The Romans had pepper but not chilies.
I just got to that part of the video and it struck me immediately as wrong too - but then I realized (as someone already has pointed out) that it's really only in the USA that corn has the specific meaning for maize, that in the rest of the world it's used pretty loosely for various cereal grains. Which got me to wondering if perhaps the narrator or writer for this episode/course was from outside the USA originally.
In Canada we refer to maize as corn. Although I'm sure your right I have never heard of cereals being referred to as corn myself. Thank you for the insight.
Best and clearest description of the Roman Republic's system I've seen in a while. And I'm 4 years late on it.
You're never late to knowledge.
Excellent video.. very informative.. I have read a large number of Roman authors, and tried to divine the structure of the Republic, but was unable.. You have cleared up so much... Thank you!
this video helped me understand more in 20minutes than my professor could in 6 weeks lol
lol you lost 6 weeks of your life lol
Can you make a playlist for all the ancient governments? This is very interesting!
17:50 the corn dole? Don't you mean grain dole, I can hardly imagine the Romans having access to corn.
The word "corn" have different meaning in British and American English.
In British English, “corn” is a general word used for any plant that is grown for its grain/seeds to produce flour, such as wheat, barley, maize and oats. In American English the word “corn” refers to the seeds of the maize plant, or the plant itself.
Exactly I was like “but wait what about Christopher”
Man i wish i had this class. Great description and very informative
It might have been worth at least briefly noting the Decemviri. They only existed for a brief time, but it was an eventful period.
+christosvoskresye You make an excellent point! Their role in helping navigate the tensions between patrician and plebeian interests in the 5th century BCE, and drawing up important laws, did indeed play an important role in the formation of the Republic.Thank you for pointing that out.
Quite right, after all they came up with the twelve tables and this particular law which I wish to bring to attention 'Table XI, Law I. Affairs of great importance shall not be transacted without the vote of the people, with whom rests the power to appoint magistrates, to condemn citizens, and to enact laws.'
The Praetor Urbis acted as the governor of Rome in absence of the Consuls . He could summon the Senate, enroll an army. He had judicial power in Rome in trials.
O Crap, where's my handout!
it'd be a blank version of that table with all the offices of magistrate and tribes
Sources for this video can be found at the end (minute 24).
+Clemens Tresunusquattuor Good videos! Hope you make more!
5:20 Excuse me, ma'am, I was not given a handout. Is the printer broken again? Do you just want us to share? Does anyone have a handout?
Our apologies!This video was created for a class. The handout was for the students enrolled in the course. Thank you for your continued viewership!
I need to say that centuries weren't composed of 100 soldiers. Centuries were composed of 10 contubernium with each composed of 8 legionaries and 2 helpers/slaves. So centuries were in fact composed of 100 men but only 80 of them were soldiers.
yes you are correct but the best video I saw
What you say is true only for the centuries as military units and only after the Marian reform of 107 BC. It is not true before and would never be true for the comitia centuriata (the assembly of centuries) which was an elective body (the 193 cited in the video).
And even in the military context, the first cohort of a legion would have five double-sized centuries (160 fighting men) , compared to the 6 normal sized centuries of the other 9 cohorts that formed a legion.
And this military organization will change often later, during the Imperial time.
PyroLegends she didn't say 100 soldiers, sir. She clearly mention that each Centuries was composed of 100 men which is correct (80 soldiers and 20 support personnel).
Once again, you mix two different concepts which had the same name but which had very little to do with each other.
THE CENTURY WAS NOT A MILITARY UNIT
... at least for more than 80% of the history of the Roman Republic. From 509 BCE to 107 BCE, so during 402 years, the smallest military units were at first phallanxes, like the Etruscans who copied from the Greeks, and then the maniple (manipulus in latin) after around 315 BCE. During that period, there were no military unit called a century.
Only in 107 BCE, 80 years before the end of the Rebublic, a military unit called the centuria in
latin was created by Marius. It is a part of the Marian reforms who completely changed the organisation of the army and the recruting of soldiers. It is the birth of the professionnal army, as opposed to an army of the citizens.
The video, quite rightly, speaks of the centuries as a way to organize the voting rights of people and they were originally composed of 100 citizens in the begining of the Republic hence the word centuria (it was also used as a mean to count people and even to levy taxes). The number of citizens in each of these "civilian" centuries would change over time but the name would stick. But it as very little to do with the army except that each century, before the Marian reform, was to provide a certain number of soldiers, which were not 100 at all but greatly depended on the wealth of the people.
No you missed the point. The Centuriata weren't necessary roman legionnaries, but citizens of arms bearing age, and she's actually talking about the middle and late republican system when the armies composed largely of militia, or consription, and the allied Italic militia. But anyroad what she's refering to is that the Centuriatas were kinda like voting blocks within the city, not actual Legion centuries. Not every arms bearing man was all the time in the Legion, because they had their own jobs, like farming and masonry, and what not.
Quick question: you mentioned why there were only 24 tribune, but I think I missed why that was? 15:08
--- just realized this is 10 years old -- but excellent video regardless!
Great question, and thanks for your viewership!
In early Roman history, six military tribunes were usually appointed to each legion, and four legions formed the Roman army.
Of course, the total number of legions at any one time fluctuated throughout Roman history, depending on whom the Romans were fighting against and how many legions needed to be raised.
We're working on a next video, so stay tuned!
Why don’t you have a ton of subscribers? You do it so well!
"Enough history! Now, some more history!"
This is pretty good i m surprised you don't have more subscribers.
its probably because she's only made 12 videos in about 4 or 5 years. UA-cam tends to favor channels that produce more content on a regular basis which is why "Let's Play" channels do so well, the make videos 2 or 3 times or more a week. There's alot more that goes into their algorithms but that's part of it. UA-cam's algorithms are dumb though, they tend to favor quantity over quality by a wide margin.
MY BRAIN, MY POOR BRAIN. WHY CANT I REMEMBER THIS STUFF LIKE I CAN REMEMBER SOMEONES FACE THAT I MET TEN YEARS AGO FOR A DREAM?!
18:54 Wait the number in brackets (8) is the literal number of humans, or like groups of humans, in this case like 8 “commitees”
Great question! Literal number of humans.
Of course, some of these numbers fluctuated a bit throughout Roman history.
7:21 By the time of Julius Caesar there were 35 voting tribes.
11:40 Are you talking about the creation of the Electoral College in the USA?
7:21 Thank you for that information!11:40 Yes, though there are obviously major differences between the modern US electoral system and the ancient Roman one (nuances we regret not having time to explore further in this series).
his name is sextus . what did you expect ?
It was pronounced Lawinia. They didn't speak Ecclesiastical Latin until 500 years after Rome's fall. The eastern half didn't even speak Ecclesiastical Latin, they spoke Greek
help me: after military service, them a SENATOR could run for any public office, in general starting as Quaestor... right? I mean, be a senator was a precondition to hold punlic office after elected, is that correct? 14:06
Wonderful video. Great explanation.
Minor detail but you didn't HAVE to serve as aedile to become praetor. You could go straight to praetor if you were old enough. Many just liked serving in it though due to the age gap and popularity to be gained.
Also, note that the axes weren't always in the fasces. They were put in under certain circumstamces.
Still like the video though, pretty good overal overview.
Excellent video, simple and effective, thank you very much. Its makes my read of the Twelve Caesars easier to understand and appreciate.
Awesome! Thank you!
keep doing those videos, you did an amazing job. I'm German but i still understood every word you said. thank you very much
Multo mihi placuit illa pellicula. Gratias tibi ago, magistra, propter explicationem tuam clarissimam!
Thanks for the explanation. Very helpful. Now everything is clear. Subbed and thumb-up!
hey Clemens Tresunusquattuor can you post your sources thankkkkkkkkks
Read Colleen McCullough, First Man of Rome collection. It is fictional history but very real. Also Polybius on Rome and Anacyclosis. It is the only thing missing on the video: meaning. It will help understand the US system and its problems.
Great video! Very informative.
Are these correct pronunciations? I've only heard starkly different ones from other scholars.
Thank you for your feedback! Wherever possible, we have attempted to use Classical Latin pronunciation based on current North American and British textbooks, which, indeed, may vary from region to region. The subject of proper ancient Greek and Latin pronunciations is certainly worth investigating!
@@clemenstresunusquattuor6626 yes it's certainly not a simple thing to make judgements on the pronunciation of words which were only in true use 2000 years ago
Keep up the good work!
You have what it takes to get to a million subscribers
This is a very clear explanation.
Thanks for this very instructive video
I get High and get my mind blown from middle school history
What about the proconsuls or Pontifs and what not?
An excellent point! Thanks for catching that.We tried to keep things simple for this nutshell version, but you are correct. Pontifs and proconsuls (especially as Rome's territory expanded) did play important roles in Rome's government and its history. Thanks!
3 tribes, with 10 curiae each = 30 curiae (not 30 tribes). Typo!
Thank you!
Is it just me or is this something for online schooling?
Very good!
Thank you for getting me ready for a latin quiz I have tomorrow.
In fact the centurate comitiiae were not that powerfull. Many new elected consuls or praetors were fired by the tribune of the plebs with their power of appeal to the people ( the all tribes)
great video tnx
The whole video overstates the importanc of ethnicity. That the three original tribus were based on ethnicity is highly questionable. Also, (Tarquinius) Collatinus was just as much a Latin as his cousin Sextus Tarquinius. Also just as much as a Etruscan. Actually, both were born-and-bred Romans, belonging to the same family. Yes, the first Tarquinius was born among the Etruscans but he left because, being half-Greek, had no prospects of a career there...
it only me who finds her voice super beautiful? (is she Scottish?)
I wouldn't refer to the numerous tribes and peoples of Italia as different "races" in the way we see race today as they clearly weren't. More accurately they were a collection of different ethnic, cultural and linguistic groups who shared a similar migration history as well as the same DNA.
You make an excellent point. The Latin word 'gens' has often in the past been translated as "race" (see Lewis & Short's Latin dictionary) and been used in Classical scholarship, for example when referring to different Italic tribes and groups. We will work on updating this terminology in the future, as the field of Classical studies also continues to change. Thank you for your comment.
awesome
1:35
Romulus: Hey, let's build on this hill for military defense.
Remus: No, let's build on this one for trade.
*Romulus digs trench*
Remus: Hey, your trench is dumb!
Romulus: Yeah, well, your hill is dumber!
*Remus and Romulus fight*
*Remus dies*
Interesting
thanks this helped me alot
A lot of the information here is incorrect. Read Prof Mary Beard's SPQR for an accurate reference.
Thank you! We weren't able to go into nuanced detail in this video, so may have missed a number of things. We will, nevertheless, be sure to check out the resource you have recommended. Thanks!
Maybe not focus on the male only stuff so doesn’t distract from the real Material
Love those classical Latin
The girl sounds like a cutie and the vids are interesting.
Thanks!
Corn? Are you serious? The roman's went all the way to the new world and got corn from the aztecs and incas there and brought it over???? Do your research!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maize Even a simple wiki search will tell you.
As pointed out in the comments, UK English uses "corn" for American English "grain". There is no need to rude. Also, you should have done your research, or at least, stage one, read the comments.
Yah...what these guys said....
It's grain, not American corn. But the Romans may have discovered America (probably went unknown in the empire tho)
Do not speak about "races" if you want to be taken seriously as a scientific commenter. The only exclusion to that is when we speak about "race" as a social construct of colonial history
Excellent point. Thank you for that.There were different tribes living in Italy at the time, of which the Latins were one.
This is history not sociology
www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html
Great video thanks!
I just wanted to point out the corn dole was impossible. It could not be corn, it was grain. Corn was brought to Europe from the old world (think maize). Corn, tomatoes, tobacco, potatoes and chili peppers all did not exist in Europe until the 16th century. The Romans had pepper but not chilies.
Good point about the corn - grain it is! Thanks for clarifying.
+XXXXHHHHHTTTTTHHHHHH You mean the New world
I just got to that part of the video and it struck me immediately as wrong too - but then I realized (as someone already has pointed out) that it's really only in the USA that corn has the specific meaning for maize, that in the rest of the world it's used pretty loosely for various cereal grains. Which got me to wondering if perhaps the narrator or writer for this episode/course was from outside the USA originally.
In Canada we refer to maize as corn. Although I'm sure your right I have never heard of cereals being referred to as corn myself. Thank you for the insight.