Talk:Jus trium liberorum

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rome, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of Rome and ancient Roman history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomeWikipedia:WikiProject RomeTemplate:WikiProject RomeRome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contradiction?

The article says that the right "was part of the Lex Papia Poppaea of AD 9", but then it mentions that it was granted to Livia in 9 BCE. I read the first sentence as implying that the right didn't exist before that date; if that's not what it means, then I think it should be rewritten to be more clear about what it does mean. —Ruakh_TALK 22:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated notice

The user "S.finny", who has no user page, added a handwritten outdated notice to the bibliography section in April 17, 2019. I was going to replace it with the Template:Outdated_as_of, but then decided to simply remove it. The article has very little information and is very basic, so I don't think the latest scholarship has made it outdated. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 17:48, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Field (1945)

Field's 1945 article is a rather peculiar choice as the most-cited source. For example, it seems to be the primary basis for the eugenic interpretation, and Field in his own voice lauds this legislation as a "valiant attempt … to maintain the racial purity of the senatorial order." Valiant? Ick. There is something in Suetonius about foreign blood, but that may say more about Suetonius than the legislation itself, which applied to all citizens, including the formerly enslaved, and the rewards for procreating more citizens seem to have most benefitted (and not always inadvertently) freedpersons. Where, for instance, are Beryl Rawson, Susan Treggiari, and Jane Gardner as midcentury experts on the Roman family and related legislation?

And yes—I too dislike it when somebody drops an "I'm so knowing" blob of criticism and then doesn't actually do anything useful. So this is just a caveat on the distortions present in the current version of the article. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]