I like the videos. I did have an exception regarding Cato, though. While true he did not campaign, it was more that he refused to campaign in the manner that was expected. In Rome at the time, giving gifts to citizens was the norm for elections and while he had the resources, he out-right refused to engage in such tactics and therefore never won Consul. He didn't just say if they want me I will win, he wanted to win without cheating. And couldn't.
These videos are all under 10 minutes, but what is here is so well-explained that I think I'm getting more information from this than I would reading a lengthy book on the subject
Multiple issues: The description is limited to so called "public trials" of the first century BCE for murder, election fraud, plundering provinces etc. For theft, fraud and similar issues the praetor urbanus or peregrinus would act more as a magistrate than a judge. They would here the plaintiff, determine if such a right exists. Than a single judge from a list would conduct the actual trial. And that was the original way of handling things.
I believe it's pronounced Pr(eye)-tor(as in British Tory). Had a Latin instructor who was big into the study of how Latin was pronounced, to the best of our knowledge, mostly based on how other languages evolved from it. Mostly bringing that up because people will inevitably make the naive argument that we don't have proper pronunciations for Latin. But there are some pretty well established rules. Other than that, loved the video, and all the videos in this series :D
i believe you mistook praetor with iudex,or at least mixed the two, praetor was creating formulae in which he gave the iudex-judge-the power to decide whether or not someone is guilty where iudex was in today's terms jury with more or less no legal expertise.the legal system was split into two-in iure-with praetor presiding and creating formula, and-apud iudicem-where judgment was dealt, this was the case up until the Principate. now this what you are talking about is true for later development of their legal system namely cognitio extraordinaria procedure but in that procedure they were not really praetors, they did take over praetor's job and iudex's job but equating the praetor with emperor's official is kinda misleading
Thanks so much, that's very kind. I've been kicking around a few ideas in my head that are less political. Nothing nailed down yet, but I have ideas. I'm painfully aware of the fact that pretty much every time a Roman woman got a little politically active she was accused of murder, which makes them tough to write about in this context. However, if I started looking at something like - for example - the Roman religion, there's much more information to draw on. So yes, I'm thinking about it. I have ideas.
+Historia Civilis Remember that in History, there is a rule, dictum, concept, etc. or whatever you want to call it, that you cannot judge the past by modern day standards. When you start talking about woman in relation to there place in society, consider the average poor or not rich man who could've been treated worse than a rich woman. The ancient peoples actually believed very much in the world around as people do today. Society interactions are much more complicated than what is usually a personal feeling.
great videos. I miss understood the nature of the senate i think lol. I'm hoping that you will clear up the question I have about the duel nature of the Consulship (there were two sitting consuls at any given point).
Imperium just means the sphere of control one might have, actually, it stretches further than just to praetors or commanders. (So yes, a governour's imperium is the rule over "his" province)
+nico laza That's easy to justify. Tribunes had no imperium, and were not actually a senator (the plebeian tribune could attend meetings and veto bills, but could not vote himself). The lowest rank which would lead to a senate seat was quaestor, which happens to be the lowest rank the uploader talks about.
I like the videos. I did have an exception regarding Cato, though. While true he did not campaign, it was more that he refused to campaign in the manner that was expected. In Rome at the time, giving gifts to citizens was the norm for elections and while he had the resources, he out-right refused to engage in such tactics and therefore never won Consul. He didn't just say if they want me I will win, he wanted to win without cheating. And couldn't.
I guess we now know the importance of campaigning
These videos are all under 10 minutes, but what is here is so well-explained that I think I'm getting more information from this than I would reading a lengthy book on the subject
Multiple issues: The description is limited to so called "public trials" of the first century BCE for murder, election fraud, plundering provinces etc.
For theft, fraud and similar issues the praetor urbanus or peregrinus would act more as a magistrate than a judge. They would here the plaintiff, determine if such a right exists. Than a single judge from a list would conduct the actual trial.
And that was the original way of handling things.
Great videos! Keep them coming!
You can observe trials today if you want. Most courts put their dockets online.
2 40 in and Roman trials remind me of ace attorney. ngl
I love your videos! Thank you!
I believe it's pronounced Pr(eye)-tor(as in British Tory).
Had a Latin instructor who was big into the study of how Latin was pronounced, to the best of our knowledge, mostly based on how other languages evolved from it. Mostly bringing that up because people will inevitably make the naive argument that we don't have proper pronunciations for Latin. But there are some pretty well established rules.
Other than that, loved the video, and all the videos in this series :D
I always assumed it was pronounced (Pray-tor)
i believe you mistook praetor with iudex,or at least mixed the two, praetor was creating formulae in which he gave the iudex-judge-the power to decide whether or not someone is guilty where iudex was in today's terms jury with more or less no legal expertise.the legal system was split into two-in iure-with praetor presiding and creating formula, and-apud iudicem-where judgment was dealt, this was the case up until the Principate. now this what you are talking about is true for later development of their legal system namely cognitio extraordinaria procedure but in that procedure they were not really praetors, they did take over praetor's job and iudex's job but equating the praetor with emperor's official is kinda misleading
Your videos are great! Could you please do more videos on Roman culture or women? :)
Thanks so much, that's very kind.
I've been kicking around a few ideas in my head that are less political. Nothing nailed down yet, but I have ideas. I'm painfully aware of the fact that pretty much every time a Roman woman got a little politically active she was accused of murder, which makes them tough to write about in this context.
However, if I started looking at something like - for example - the Roman religion, there's much more information to draw on.
So yes, I'm thinking about it. I have ideas.
+Historia Civilis One thing... did you say in the video (at 5:40) that Caesar was given governorship over _Italy?_
Did you not mean to say Spain?
CUOME BAAHAHAACK!
+Historia Civilis Remember that in History, there is a rule, dictum, concept, etc. or whatever you want to call it, that you cannot judge the past by modern day standards. When you start talking about woman in relation to there place in society, consider the average poor or not rich man who could've been treated worse than a rich woman. The ancient peoples actually believed very much in the world around as people do today. Society interactions are much more complicated than what is usually a personal feeling.
great videos. I miss understood the nature of the senate i think lol. I'm hoping that you will clear up the question I have about the duel nature of the Consulship (there were two sitting consuls at any given point).
Great video. A small typo: at 1:39, the pannel should read "Condemnatio" (you forgot the last "i").
Imperium just means the sphere of control one might have, actually, it stretches further than just to praetors or commanders.
(So yes, a governour's imperium is the rule over "his" province)
Do videos of Cato and Cicero
Very good! I hope to see more of your videos in the future!
I loves this channel
No mention of tribunes.
+nico laza That's easy to justify. Tribunes had no imperium, and were not actually a senator (the plebeian tribune could attend meetings and veto bills, but could not vote himself). The lowest rank which would lead to a senate seat was quaestor, which happens to be the lowest rank the uploader talks about.
Weird that we still have filibusters in congress and for me parliament back then it had a purpose
Could you try adding/using pictures instead of just shape icons and text? I think it would probably make the presentation a bit more *engaging*
Which Caesar?