Talk:Res publica

This page is referenced by nothing. There is NO references. No books are quoted. No articles quoted. Nothing. This page is total Original research.WHEELER 03:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

This is what original research from Wikipedia:No_original_research:

Original research (OR) is a term used in Wikipedia to refer to unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories. The term also applies to any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position — or, in the words of Wikipedia's co-founder Jimmy Wales, would amount to a "novel narrative or historical interpretation."

Wikipedia is not the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked:

What does this say: it says "CITING SOURCES AND AVOIDING ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARE INEXTRICABLY LINKED". This is what it says and the Notice for Deletion WILL remain until Sources are provided or it gets deleted.WHEELER 03:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion_policy Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion

This page has NO references, No Bibliography, No Journals, No nothing. It is all original research.WHEELER 05:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up. Bits of it are OR, and a lot of it needs removing. The core of it, I'd say, is not OR, it's just for the most part totally unreferenced. I've added the L&S as a reference, though on its own, it's a bit of a stretch for the entire section in whch I've quoted it; can you think of some other good reputable references which will deal directly with this issue? I don't especially want to search through APh if I can help it as I'm currently away from my usual library. --Nema Fakei 01:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The Oxford Classical Dictionary might have some things about the republic-as-opposed-to-monarchy side of things. Why I haven't got a copy of my own, I don't really know, I'm not so miserly with texts... --Nema Fakei 03:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The Roman Constitution

Funny, but here is the Roman Constitution which seems to be overlooked; not quoted at length and seen. But here is the real McCoy---The Roman res publica, as promulgated by Romulus:

"...he immediately resolved to appoint senators, with whom he would administer public affairs, and he chose 100 men from the patricians. ... When he had determined these regulations, he distinguished the ... powers which he wished each class to have. For the king he chose the following prerogatives : first, to have the chief authority in rites and sacrifices, ... then, to maintain the guardianship of the laws and the national customs, ... to judge in person the greatest crimes, but to leave the lesser crimes to the senators, ... to summon the Senate and to convoke the Assembly, ... to have absolute command in war. To the council of the Senate ... he assigned the following authority : to decide and to vote on whatever matter the king introduced. ... To the common people he granted these three things : to elect the magistrates and to ratify the laws and to decide on war whenever the king permitted ... The people did not vote all together, but they were convoked by curias."

This comes by the way of -->The Roman Law Library, by Y. Lassard and A. Koptev. English section, Laws of the Kings, Romulus, #3

What do you notice about that Roman constituion under Romulus? It is a picture perfect mirror of the Spartan model! Look at it gentlemen! There it is in Black and White! Romulus had a Senate and the assemblies. Just like Sparta. Command in War, just like Sparta. The Senate "to decide and vote on matters", just like Sparta, And assemblies to either approve or disapprove, just like the assembly at Sparta!

It is all right there.WHEELER 00:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Now a very curious thing
Now Cicero, that very prominent Latin Lawyer, who visited Sparta wrote De re publica. He wrote:

Book II, ix; "It was after he had adopted this policy that Romulus first discovered and approved the principle which Lycurgus had discovered at Sparta a short time before—that a State can be better governed and guided by the authority of one man, that is by the power of a king, if the influence of the State's most eminent men is joined to the ruler's absolute power. Accordingly supported and guarded by such a body of advisers, to which we may give the Senate, ...

"He also gave complete obedience to the auspices, a custom which we still observe tot he great security of the State.

Book II, x; "And after Romulus had reigned thirty-seven years, and established those two excellent foundations of our commonwealth, the auspices and the senate..." (Loeb edition)

Cicero marks the beginning of the Commonwealth, "et haec egregia duo firmamenta rei publicae, auspicia et senatum..."

Cicero's states that the Republic started UNDER Romulus with the establishment of the Senate and Auspices! Look at this article Res publica, and the Wikipedia Republic and isn't there discrepancies? WP article states a Republic DIMINISHES religion and that a Republic is anything "without a monarch".

Cicero's De re publica is ALL about mixed government. Where is that in this article about "res publica"? There are major slants and discrepancies here in all these Articles. Someone is NOT reading something or reading comprehension is not so good but a clear reading of Cicero states the exact opposite.

-->"In all the republics of antiquity the government was divided between a senate and a popular assembly; and in cases where a king stood at the head of affairs, as at Sparta, the king had little more than the executive." Article by Leonhard Schmitz, Ph.D., F.R.S.E., Rector of the High School of Edinburgh, of William Smith (editor), D.C.L., LL.D.: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, John Murray, London, 1875. on pp 1016‑1022

So somebody is fooling somebody. There are major discrepancies and this article is terribly faulty and so is the scholarship.WHEELER 01:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Now look at this information and look at the Wikpedia article on Republic, Classical republic, Res publica, Republicanism, Classical republicanism and tell me that something ain't right.WHEELER 01:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Cicero's De re publica, If you read it for yourself, has the words mixed constantly through it! Cicero talks about a "Fourth" type of government. Cicero's whole book De re publica is about MIXED government and you know what? The Word "mixed" and the word "fourth" don't appear in Wikipedia's De re publica or in this article on Res publica. Something Ain't Right here folks.WHEELER 01:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The article on De re publica currently only gives the form in which the text is transmitted and presented. I see no reason why a summary of its content shouldn't be included: feel very free to include the word 'mixed' in any summary you care to write. --Nema Fakei 23:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

And you are smoking what kind of drug? They call me a lunatic but you need to check yourself in my friend. What me edit? Put in "mixed government" and "Fourth type of government"? If that is what Cicero wrote, Then it undermines all your articles and related articles on Republic! Besides that is original research. If I put that in there, it would be deleted as hearsay and original research. Thanks but no thanks. That is a political hot potato around here. I don't think you grasp the import of what you are saying. Putting Mixed government into that Article "De re publica" means that Re publica is about MIXED GOVERNMENT. Cicero CLEARLY states that the "commonwealth" started UNDER Romulus. This shoots your Republic, your Roman Republic, your Classical republic, your res publica, your politiea, your Republicanism, your Classical republicanism, your List of republics all to hell. I don't think I you want that incriminating evidence, that logic, to enter in. Your as foolish and lunatic as I am.WHEELER 02:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Quotes

I have placed the lengthy set of quotes formerly in the article into Talk:Res publica/quotes. While clumsily and incompletely cited, they may eventually prove useful. Here also are more citations for the use of res publica under the Emperors. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC):

• Pliny the Younger to Trajan: "the provincials joined with us in imploring the gods that they would be graciously pleased to preserve you and the republic in that state of prosperity which your many and great virtues.." Letters X, 51. "Diocletian indispensible to the republic." Historia Augusta Carus §10. Eumenius of Autun received 600,000 sesterces "from the republic", temp. Constantius I, W. S. Maguinness "Eumenius of Autun" Greece & Rome, Vol. 21, No. 63. (Oct., 1952), pp. 97-103. "The Emperor and his republic" Inscription from Ephesus, from the time of Constantius II. Edited and translated by Louis J. Swift and James H. Oliver. "Constantius II on Flavius Philippus" The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 83, No. 3. (Jul., 1962), pp. 247-264. Articles have JSTOR links.