The distinction between kingship (customary (or constitutional) and limited by those customs, but also generally long-lasting) and tyranny (extra-constitutional and less limited, but also highly unstable) is a distinction that I think remains valid to the present.
-
-
Näytä tämä ketju
-
And don't miss the fireside book recommendation, which is
@GabrielDBaker , Spare No One: Mass Violence in Roman Warfare (2021) - a valuable (if grim) book on a topic which has long been wanting and a useful antidote to overly sanitized accounts of ancient warfare besides!Näytä tämä ketju -
Also, in case anyone missed it, modest changes to the ACOUP Patreon: a new tier 'patres et matres conscripti' has been added. They get all of the same things as the amici, but also get to suggest/vote for questions and topics to appear on the blog.https://www.patreon.com/user?u=20122096
Näytä tämä ketju -
And don't worry, we'll be back to The Queen's Latin (Part III) next week!
Näytä tämä ketju
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
There is no such thing as one man rule. A bunch of people decide that such and such person or persons represents their own beliefs about how things should go. It's a committee and a significant portion of the population (a third?) that decides how things should go.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Why did Latin retain the word "Rex" despite almost 1000 years without a king in the roman world, from Tarquin to Odoacer. Are there connotations of foreignness?
-
Yes - Reges end up as things other people have, even after Rome goes back to a monarchy.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Sorry this is the first time I saw this photo of you and this is the most badass supervillain shit ever.
-
LOL - I do these for just about every fireside, though this one is cropped differently and I suppose taking the picture reading SPARE NO ONE does have a pretty awesome supervillian vibe. Though there was also this one:pic.twitter.com/9H6DrdJl9Q
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Your tyranny/monarchy distinction and discussion of how every tyrant wants to make his heirs monarchs immediately brings to mind North Korea, where we are actually seeing this transition in real time.
-
Also, a question: are successful tyranny-to-monarchy transitions usually characterized by deification (in part or in full) of the ruling dynasty? It happened in Rome and North Korea that way, after all.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.