Hope you enjoy and learn something from the Language Evolution of Latin I just showed you. Set your mind-open, and widen your skope, don't stay narrow mate. All that needed to be said is said by me, and I hope you learned something by the end of the day. I can recommend you a book or 2 if you would like that about Latin language history.
@Gardash111 Thank you very much, i could use some help. It was very nice and amusing talking to you. One last thing: if you never heard of something that does not mean it does not exist. Think about it. No hard feelings.
" if you never heard of something that does not mean it does not exist", no wonder he knows nothing about Latin haha. He passed school with that sentence?
Yeah, if I ever have a son, I'll name him Vercingetorix-Ram! That's a cool name! That's a fighters name-a winner! Who would name thr kid after a salad or after C-section: Caesar!
Caesar didnt treat the populace of Gaul bad at all. He was very kind to each tribe that fought against and for him. Caesar knew that he couldnt control in the way they say he did.
Kidding me? Lack of historical knowledge? Caesar was about to be called for trial for genocide against the Gauls by the Senate lol.. So much for "Caesar didnt treat the populace of Gaul bad at all"..
this is somewhat biased to see Ceaser and his decisions in posthoc light of his later evets, and takes a negative connotation on him. also there are a few small historical inacuracies, read: Ceaser: A Life of a Colossus for a well balanced book
No, this is so wrong! I was there, and this info is so wrong. We marched 30,000 foot but were cut off at what we called nan-Da pass due to a land slide and an early, heavy snow.
I believe the book you are looking for is 'The Gallic War: Seven Commentaries on the Gallic War with an Eighth Commentary by Aulus Hirtius' published by Oxford World's Classics. There are also online versions of the book available on various websites/online libraries.
@simbadsail Great in style? I found the Latin version a bit "dry" - it was more of a logbook sometimes. It was amusing though. However, keep in mind guys, that much of the things he wrote in his "diary" were meant to impress the people of Rome. So that he could give himself more credit.
Well Gardash, I'm roman and I studied "The bello gallico" in Latin , at the time. Believe me it's exceptionally well written and fashinating. Probably with "dry" you mean that his style is essential, wich is a merit.
I'm sorry, but if you read my post you would understand that I too have studied the Commentarii de B.G. in Latin, so I really do not see how this adds any weight to your argument. Also, you being from Rome 2011 A.D. does not in anyway mean you have a connection to the Latins...
The Aeneid is what I call well written. The Commentarii are just a simple logbook, just like Xenophon's memoire (of which the name i forgot) about his "conquest" in Anatolia.
the name is Anabasis, but you are wrong. De bello Gallico is a well written memorial, you can't copare it and the Anabasis with poems like Virgil Aeneid or Omer Odissey.
True, the Commentarii and Anabasis are memoirs instead of literature/poetry like Aeneid/Odysseia are and thus difficult to compare to them by literary value. Now, what did I say different in my comment?
Late comment sorry - but I didn't see this page in a long while. Indeed, that is what I was saying - the Comentarii de Bello Gallico are not very well written. I don't get why this is such a difficult thing to comprehend. The Commentarii were simply not a work of literature like the Aeneid.
@Gardash111 You do know that Italy has something to do with Ancient Rome, do you? You also know that Italian is the closest national language to Latin? Maybe there's a little connection, when at school i had to translate passages from De B. G. i almost didn't have to use my dictionary cause what you call "dry" is just "simple" language coming from a man whose main job was not to write and i was an average student not a genius.
This is simply not true, or let me put it this way: you oversimplify it. Italian is as close to Latin as all Romance-Languages (French, Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Romanian and Catalan). It's not closer at all. I don't like to repeat myself but here goes: being from Rome 2011 A.D. does not in anyway mean you have a connection to the ancient Latins.
One can say in all earnesty that modern day Italy has *no* connection with the ancient Romans, not in the way Italian nationalists think
@Gardash111 Again you're wrong: Italian is not as close as all romance languages are. It's more than that: italian is the first romance language being the ancient Romans living and growing in the country later called Italy. If you don't like repeating yourself then just don't. How can you say that Italy has not connection with the land the Romans started, grown and spread from in? I'm neither roman nor nationalist, just study Italian: you'll see the resemblance.
Go and study Spanish, French and Portugese - you will see that they resemble Latin as close as any Romance Language. Italian is not more Latin than French or Spanish.
Secondly, Ancient Romans have indeed no connection with modern day Italy. Not only the limited Roman citizinship is a factor here (which sparked the Social Wars) but also the fact of mass immigration through out the ages, and the many different Italian tribes, Greeks, Etruskians and Gauls, not to forget barbarians later
@Gardash111 There's a close resemblance but not as much as Italian: i'll give you some hints; Italian is the only national romance language that has retained Latin's contrast between short and long consonants- gemination- Spanish, French and Portugese don't have it, maybe Catalan does, and is the most conservative preserving many words nearly unchanged from Vulgar Latin. What does it tell you? It's you the one who needs to study these languages, my friend.
I will ask you just one question: how do you know how latin consonants were exactly pronounced? To be honest, this is the evidence for me you (no disrespect intended) don't know a lot about languages. The first thing I was told when studying Latin is that we have absolutely no clue how Latin was pronounced.
Italian is not descended from Vulgar Latin - Vulgar Latin is the 'Italianizzazione' of Latin as a language within the Roman Catholic Church because it was situated in Rome.
@Gardash111 Oh My god... Italianizzazione is just the pronounciation of ecclesiatical latin not vulgar latin's which already existed back then, by vulgar we mean spoken by the people of Rome as opposed from classical latin spoken by aristocracy and scholars. How do i know? Annus means year while anus means ring, if you don't pronounce the double "n" you can't tell the difference. In Italian fummo means we were, fumo means smoke. You just know no nothing.
Son, honestly - are you dumbby nature or by practise? Don't talk about things you don't understand. Ecclesiatical latin IS Vulgar Latin. Hence the term 'Vulgate' for a Latin Bible. Priests were ordered to stop using Classic Latin, and to switch to Vulgar Latin so that the people would understand them. The people were so mixed that they did not understand real (= classical) Latin (that Romans used) because of italianizzazione.
Hence, scientists still do not know how latin was spoken.
@Gardash111 You're more ignorant than i thought and you can't even read: Vulgar Latin was spoken by the lower and working classes of Ancient Rome while classical was spoken by healthy ans well educated ones, is that clear now, you moron? Italianizzazione has nothing to do with vulgar latin, just buy an italian dictionary. You probably meant italianate which refers only to Ecclesiastical Latin's pronouciation and not to where it comes from.
Excuse me, 'moron'? Great show of argumentation capacity there! Vulgar Latin was Latin spoken by the lower classes, did I say anything to disprove that? Hm? Show me, show me where I said anything to contradict that. Jezus, do you even read what I type?
It might be too heavy on your intelligence, but try to follow the steps:
1- Ancient Latin is 'codified' into Classical Latin
2- Lower Romans talk 'bad' Latin cuz lack education = Vulgar Latin
@Gardash111 I gave you an awful lot of arguments so far but you're too stupid to understand'em: you refer to classic latin as real, as opposed to what? Fake or untrue latin? Vulgar latin is not fake then you use italian word without even knowing the meaning -italianizzazione- you refuse to acknowledge a given fact like gemination cause you never heard of that i also gave you some examples of that but you didn't check cause you're too afraid to be wrong. Go back to school if ever went to.
Hence saying that Italian got its pronunciation from Vulgar Latin, is changing things around: Vulgar Latin got its pronunciation because of 'italianizzazione'. That is why it referred to as "Vulgar" i.e. Impure Latin.
Was Caesar a dictator?Yes! As dictator,why he not weed out senate of 'elites' since as u claim he was 4 the 'people'? Coz he no different than those elites! Look at the bigger
picture! He bamboozled the countryfolk so they fought his wars and Caesar filled Rome coffers w/land & riches from Middle East, Africa..surely he never complained of Egyptian trappings! He was a greed&othr greeds killed him! If ur greatness comes from massacreing then sorry ur not great @ all! & look what happened 2Rome!
Caeser was not working for the Optimates (The Roman elites). In point of fact he was determined to rule the Roman State. He want the favor of the people. This conflict between the Populares and Optimates occured due to all the farmland being taken over by the rich Optimates and the common folk being left with nothing. The continual wars after the 2nd Punic war bled the Roman yeoman farmers white. They formed the infantry backbone of the Roman Army at that time. Marius changed it to a paid force.
Caesar was just a tool of roman elites. He used dirty tactics which n modern times wud b considered violations of war conduct such as spiking trenches which is like burying grenades n ground! He is greedy for land&power & n the end he gets killed by his own people! I'd side w/ Vercingetorix 'cos he gave a good fight against oppression, was shown no mercy&now remembered great warrior! Caesar is like a Bush greed for power,wealth & n end, nobody really likes him! That's a cool name: Vercingetorix!
i always wonder what the world would be like if the other guy won..? ie vercingetorix beats ceaser or if napoleon won, or if japan invented the A bomb... imagine
So Caesar learnt well. After failing to take the hillside town of Gergovia he followed Vercingetorix to Alesia and where the Gauls set up the same hillside camp. This time he didnt take them on directly in territory favouring the defenders but became the defender himself. Cool stuff.
I think this would have to be - after the 300 Spartans - the most studied battle in the Ancient world. Vercingetorix withdrew to the hilltop advantage of Alesia voluntarily though, believing Caesar would not dare to assail him as he had in Gergovia where the hill gave the Gauls an advantage, but he never expected the fortifications on the scale that Caesar ordered this time. And even then he probably overestimated the capability of his external Gallic allies to lift the seige. Great battle.
Gaius Julius Caesar was his real name. The first name is like what mum and dad give you or I = Christian name. So Gaius is his given name. Julius = family name. Or effectively "Julii" = the clan he is related to. The last name is his also a family name, but a distinctive branch of say the Julii clan. The Caesarea branch. Its all part of the Tri Nomina which in short is the three name system Romans used. They might add one more name at the very end tied in with some distinction = an Agnomina.
The later Roman Emperors after Augustus (who was adopted by Julius) gradually corrupted the use of the "Caesar" family name to apply in affect to being a title of supreme ruler. This was so they could claim a bit of Julius and Augustus "star power". Hence we see that an unrelated Emperor might be greeted as "Caesar" despite having no relation to the Julii or Caesarian branches of that family.
@therox68
Hope you enjoy and learn something from the Language Evolution of Latin I just showed you. Set your mind-open, and widen your skope, don't stay narrow mate. All that needed to be said is said by me, and I hope you learned something by the end of the day. I can recommend you a book or 2 if you would like that about Latin language history.
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 Thank you very much, i could use some help. It was very nice and amusing talking to you. One last thing: if you never heard of something that does not mean it does not exist. Think about it. No hard feelings.
therox68 3 months ago
Comment removed
mattstewart1981 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@therox68 I liked you guys better when you were insulting each other.
It was a lot more entertaining.
mattstewart1981 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
" if you never heard of something that does not mean it does not exist", no wonder he knows nothing about Latin haha. He passed school with that sentence?
Gardash111 1 month ago
@Gardash111 I liked you guys better when you were insulting each other. It was a lot more entertaining.
mattstewart1981 1 month ago
@mattstewart1981 Swearing is funnier than being polite? That's good to know, from now on I'll keep it in mind.
therox68 1 month ago
@therox68
10- Fall of Roman Empire
11- Church wants to get closer to Christian people spread in Europe who spoke Vulgar Latin
12- Church lets go of classical latin, and switches to Vulgar Latin (Council of Tours in 813), so Classical Latin was not spoken anymore
13- Vulgar Latin spoken by church becomes further italianised, Ecclestial Latin is born
13- Classical Latin becomes extint as a spoken language, since no institution uses it anymore. Only grammar remains.
Gardash111 3 months ago
@therox68
5- 'Barbaric' (Continental and Alpine Celts -etc-) people start migrating to Italy
6- Vulgar Latin (because lack of proper education among lower classes) gets more and more outside influence
7- Less Latin people, and more Italian and 'outside-barbaric' influence leads to italianisation of Vulgar Latin
8- Classic and Vulgar become further alienated
(increasing social tension within Roman Republic and Rome, difference between rulers and ruled grows)
9- Church established, uses Clas. Lat
Gardash111 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LEON DENIS
LE GENIE CELTIQUE ET LE MONDE INVISIBLE
spirite.free.fr/ouvrages/genie/genie.htm
silviompge 4 months ago
I thought it was called Gallic conquest?
Graham6762 10 months ago
Yeah, if I ever have a son, I'll name him Vercingetorix-Ram! That's a cool name! That's a fighters name-a winner! Who would name thr kid after a salad or after C-section: Caesar!
1rendezvous 1 year ago
@1rendezvous and they wonder why bullying in school occurs
stuka80 1 year ago
@1rendezvous
I will give you pie when you show me a person who's actually named like that lol!
Gardash111 1 year ago
Caesar didnt treat the populace of Gaul bad at all. He was very kind to each tribe that fought against and for him. Caesar knew that he couldnt control in the way they say he did.
Oldcartoons571 1 year ago
@Oldcartoons571
Kidding me? Lack of historical knowledge? Caesar was about to be called for trial for genocide against the Gauls by the Senate lol.. So much for "Caesar didnt treat the populace of Gaul bad at all"..
Gardash111 1 year ago
@Gardash111
Are you joking?, seems you don't know ancient world at all.
Miauriceful 1 year ago
@Miauriceful
Arguments please. Thank you.
Gardash111 1 year ago
Would anyone know if there are any remains or artifacts there?
samk1101 1 year ago
remember Gergovia!
fidel1be 1 year ago
this is somewhat biased to see Ceaser and his decisions in posthoc light of his later evets, and takes a negative connotation on him. also there are a few small historical inacuracies, read: Ceaser: A Life of a Colossus for a well balanced book
DjMinev 1 year ago
No, this is so wrong! I was there, and this info is so wrong. We marched 30,000 foot but were cut off at what we called nan-Da pass due to a land slide and an early, heavy snow.
wolfofthewhitemt 2 years ago
@wolfofthewhitemt
Did you get sliced up by the celts lol?
womblewandering 1 year ago
Where can i get a copy of ceasars diary? has it been published somewhere?
CocaPepsis 2 years ago 11
I believe the book you are looking for is 'The Gallic War: Seven Commentaries on the Gallic War with an Eighth Commentary by Aulus Hirtius' published by Oxford World's Classics. There are also online versions of the book available on various websites/online libraries.
Sharper1971 2 years ago
Read it, it's great in style and content. It is written in third person and it's astounding to see the history in front of you
simbadsail 2 years ago 12
@simbadsail Great in style? I found the Latin version a bit "dry" - it was more of a logbook sometimes. It was amusing though. However, keep in mind guys, that much of the things he wrote in his "diary" were meant to impress the people of Rome. So that he could give himself more credit.
Gardash111 1 year ago
@Gardash111
Well Gardash, I'm roman and I studied "The bello gallico" in Latin , at the time. Believe me it's exceptionally well written and fashinating. Probably with "dry" you mean that his style is essential, wich is a merit.
simbadsail 1 year ago
@simbadsail
I'm sorry, but if you read my post you would understand that I too have studied the Commentarii de B.G. in Latin, so I really do not see how this adds any weight to your argument. Also, you being from Rome 2011 A.D. does not in anyway mean you have a connection to the Latins...
The Aeneid is what I call well written. The Commentarii are just a simple logbook, just like Xenophon's memoire (of which the name i forgot) about his "conquest" in Anatolia.
Gardash111 1 year ago
@Gardash111 Anabasis
simbadsail 1 year ago
@Gardash111
the name is Anabasis, but you are wrong. De bello Gallico is a well written memorial, you can't copare it and the Anabasis with poems like Virgil Aeneid or Omer Odissey.
Miauriceful 1 year ago
@Miauriceful
True, the Commentarii and Anabasis are memoirs instead of literature/poetry like Aeneid/Odysseia are and thus difficult to compare to them by literary value. Now, what did I say different in my comment?
Gardash111 1 year ago
@Gardash111
You said Aeneid is what you call a well written, so you claim Commentarii aren't, while Ceaser wrote them very well.
You can compare De Bello Gallico with De Bello Civili, Ceasar was less inspirated for the second.
Miauriceful 1 year ago
@Miauriceful
Late comment sorry - but I didn't see this page in a long while. Indeed, that is what I was saying - the Comentarii de Bello Gallico are not very well written. I don't get why this is such a difficult thing to comprehend. The Commentarii were simply not a work of literature like the Aeneid.
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 You do know that Italy has something to do with Ancient Rome, do you? You also know that Italian is the closest national language to Latin? Maybe there's a little connection, when at school i had to translate passages from De B. G. i almost didn't have to use my dictionary cause what you call "dry" is just "simple" language coming from a man whose main job was not to write and i was an average student not a genius.
therox68 3 months ago
@therox68
This is simply not true, or let me put it this way: you oversimplify it. Italian is as close to Latin as all Romance-Languages (French, Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Romanian and Catalan). It's not closer at all. I don't like to repeat myself but here goes: being from Rome 2011 A.D. does not in anyway mean you have a connection to the ancient Latins.
One can say in all earnesty that modern day Italy has *no* connection with the ancient Romans, not in the way Italian nationalists think
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 Again you're wrong: Italian is not as close as all romance languages are. It's more than that: italian is the first romance language being the ancient Romans living and growing in the country later called Italy. If you don't like repeating yourself then just don't. How can you say that Italy has not connection with the land the Romans started, grown and spread from in? I'm neither roman nor nationalist, just study Italian: you'll see the resemblance.
therox68 3 months ago
@therox68
Go and study Spanish, French and Portugese - you will see that they resemble Latin as close as any Romance Language. Italian is not more Latin than French or Spanish.
Secondly, Ancient Romans have indeed no connection with modern day Italy. Not only the limited Roman citizinship is a factor here (which sparked the Social Wars) but also the fact of mass immigration through out the ages, and the many different Italian tribes, Greeks, Etruskians and Gauls, not to forget barbarians later
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 There's a close resemblance but not as much as Italian: i'll give you some hints; Italian is the only national romance language that has retained Latin's contrast between short and long consonants- gemination- Spanish, French and Portugese don't have it, maybe Catalan does, and is the most conservative preserving many words nearly unchanged from Vulgar Latin. What does it tell you? It's you the one who needs to study these languages, my friend.
therox68 3 months ago
@therox68
I will ask you just one question: how do you know how latin consonants were exactly pronounced? To be honest, this is the evidence for me you (no disrespect intended) don't know a lot about languages. The first thing I was told when studying Latin is that we have absolutely no clue how Latin was pronounced.
Italian is not descended from Vulgar Latin - Vulgar Latin is the 'Italianizzazione' of Latin as a language within the Roman Catholic Church because it was situated in Rome.
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 Oh My god... Italianizzazione is just the pronounciation of ecclesiatical latin not vulgar latin's which already existed back then, by vulgar we mean spoken by the people of Rome as opposed from classical latin spoken by aristocracy and scholars. How do i know? Annus means year while anus means ring, if you don't pronounce the double "n" you can't tell the difference. In Italian fummo means we were, fumo means smoke. You just know no nothing.
therox68 3 months ago
@therox68
Son, honestly - are you dumbby nature or by practise? Don't talk about things you don't understand. Ecclesiatical latin IS Vulgar Latin. Hence the term 'Vulgate' for a Latin Bible. Priests were ordered to stop using Classic Latin, and to switch to Vulgar Latin so that the people would understand them. The people were so mixed that they did not understand real (= classical) Latin (that Romans used) because of italianizzazione.
Hence, scientists still do not know how latin was spoken.
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 You're more ignorant than i thought and you can't even read: Vulgar Latin was spoken by the lower and working classes of Ancient Rome while classical was spoken by healthy ans well educated ones, is that clear now, you moron? Italianizzazione has nothing to do with vulgar latin, just buy an italian dictionary. You probably meant italianate which refers only to Ecclesiastical Latin's pronouciation and not to where it comes from.
therox68 3 months ago
@therox68
Excuse me, 'moron'? Great show of argumentation capacity there! Vulgar Latin was Latin spoken by the lower classes, did I say anything to disprove that? Hm? Show me, show me where I said anything to contradict that. Jezus, do you even read what I type?
It might be too heavy on your intelligence, but try to follow the steps:
1- Ancient Latin is 'codified' into Classical Latin
2- Lower Romans talk 'bad' Latin cuz lack education = Vulgar Latin
3- Rome starts expanding into Italy and EU
Gardash111 3 months ago
@Gardash111 I gave you an awful lot of arguments so far but you're too stupid to understand'em: you refer to classic latin as real, as opposed to what? Fake or untrue latin? Vulgar latin is not fake then you use italian word without even knowing the meaning -italianizzazione- you refuse to acknowledge a given fact like gemination cause you never heard of that i also gave you some examples of that but you didn't check cause you're too afraid to be wrong. Go back to school if ever went to.
therox68 3 months ago
@therox68
post #2:
Hence saying that Italian got its pronunciation from Vulgar Latin, is changing things around: Vulgar Latin got its pronunciation because of 'italianizzazione'. That is why it referred to as "Vulgar" i.e. Impure Latin.
Gardash111 3 months ago
@CocaPepsis try Amazon
tonylast47 1 year ago
@CocaPepsis try amazon. It's called "The Gallic Wars"
fauxjewboy2 11 months ago
@CocaPepsis do you want to take over the world? :D
TheSjpatrik 2 weeks ago
Was Caesar a dictator?Yes! As dictator,why he not weed out senate of 'elites' since as u claim he was 4 the 'people'? Coz he no different than those elites! Look at the bigger
picture! He bamboozled the countryfolk so they fought his wars and Caesar filled Rome coffers w/land & riches from Middle East, Africa..surely he never complained of Egyptian trappings! He was a greed&othr greeds killed him! If ur greatness comes from massacreing then sorry ur not great @ all! & look what happened 2Rome!
1rendezvous 2 years ago
Caeser was not working for the Optimates (The Roman elites). In point of fact he was determined to rule the Roman State. He want the favor of the people. This conflict between the Populares and Optimates occured due to all the farmland being taken over by the rich Optimates and the common folk being left with nothing. The continual wars after the 2nd Punic war bled the Roman yeoman farmers white. They formed the infantry backbone of the Roman Army at that time. Marius changed it to a paid force.
vikingkeith 2 years ago
Caesar was just a tool of roman elites. He used dirty tactics which n modern times wud b considered violations of war conduct such as spiking trenches which is like burying grenades n ground! He is greedy for land&power & n the end he gets killed by his own people! I'd side w/ Vercingetorix 'cos he gave a good fight against oppression, was shown no mercy&now remembered great warrior! Caesar is like a Bush greed for power,wealth & n end, nobody really likes him! That's a cool name: Vercingetorix!
1rendezvous 2 years ago
@1rendezvous
I find it very interesting why your comment got so many negative votes?
Gardash111 1 year ago
Peter Connolly is a superb historian - one of my favorites.
tacotony24 2 years ago 3
i always wonder what the world would be like if the other guy won..? ie vercingetorix beats ceaser or if napoleon won, or if japan invented the A bomb... imagine
jerikco1 2 years ago 3
No army marches 100 miles a day, not for long any way.
maggiethefox 3 years ago
WOW
RSENALdotNET 3 years ago
So Caesar learnt well. After failing to take the hillside town of Gergovia he followed Vercingetorix to Alesia and where the Gauls set up the same hillside camp. This time he didnt take them on directly in territory favouring the defenders but became the defender himself. Cool stuff.
aeonflux67 3 years ago
he out manuvered vercingetorix and forced him into alesia.
BlueCrystalGem 3 years ago
I think this would have to be - after the 300 Spartans - the most studied battle in the Ancient world. Vercingetorix withdrew to the hilltop advantage of Alesia voluntarily though, believing Caesar would not dare to assail him as he had in Gergovia where the hill gave the Gauls an advantage, but he never expected the fortifications on the scale that Caesar ordered this time. And even then he probably overestimated the capability of his external Gallic allies to lift the seige. Great battle.
aeonflux67 3 years ago
Was 'Caesar' his last name? Like for instance my last name is 'Jones' for instance. or was 'Caesar' the title he held?-i'm confused
crawhip2 3 years ago
Gaius Julius Caesar was his real name. The first name is like what mum and dad give you or I = Christian name. So Gaius is his given name. Julius = family name. Or effectively "Julii" = the clan he is related to. The last name is his also a family name, but a distinctive branch of say the Julii clan. The Caesarea branch. Its all part of the Tri Nomina which in short is the three name system Romans used. They might add one more name at the very end tied in with some distinction = an Agnomina.
aeonflux67 3 years ago
The later Roman Emperors after Augustus (who was adopted by Julius) gradually corrupted the use of the "Caesar" family name to apply in affect to being a title of supreme ruler. This was so they could claim a bit of Julius and Augustus "star power". Hence we see that an unrelated Emperor might be greeted as "Caesar" despite having no relation to the Julii or Caesarian branches of that family.
aeonflux67 3 years ago 3
thanks
aodhan01 3 years ago