User talk:Ifly6/Publius Clodius Pulcher
Coins and Clodius
[edit]@T8612: Hello there yet again. Are there any coins which depict things related to Clodius? Eg the lex frumentaria or some other kind of Clodian legislation? Thanks! Ifly6 (talk) 17:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, no. Same with Cicero. T8612 (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Are there also really no coins related to leges frumentariae? Ifly6 (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- There are several, but they date from the Gracchi's and Saturninus' time. I think it is possible that Cicero exaggerated the division of the political class caused by Clodius' deeds; it might have only been a feud between them that did not polarise the political debate. From the coins, this debate in the 50s seems to have been mostly focused on Pompey and the "Triumvirs" actions. T8612 (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- (Well, I think Robb 2010 is convincing so you'll have no disagreement from me here re Cicero's exaggerations of Clodius.) Do you think it would be acceptable to use them as illustrations, with the proper anachronistic qualification, for the Clodian lex frumentaria here? Ifly6 (talk) 23:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Not really, context was different. Clodius' father minted coins though, but they are unimpressive. T8612 (talk) 08:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- (Well, I think Robb 2010 is convincing so you'll have no disagreement from me here re Cicero's exaggerations of Clodius.) Do you think it would be acceptable to use them as illustrations, with the proper anachronistic qualification, for the Clodian lex frumentaria here? Ifly6 (talk) 23:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- There are several, but they date from the Gracchi's and Saturninus' time. I think it is possible that Cicero exaggerated the division of the political class caused by Clodius' deeds; it might have only been a feud between them that did not polarise the political debate. From the coins, this debate in the 50s seems to have been mostly focused on Pompey and the "Triumvirs" actions. T8612 (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Are there also really no coins related to leges frumentariae? Ifly6 (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Feedback
[edit]@Avilich, NebY, StarTrekker, and T8612: Hi. I'm pinging you because I think you've offered good feedback before. If you have any on this draft article, let me know. Ifly6 (talk) 06:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- I think it really looks great! My only real comment is that I think more discussion on his ancestry might be a good idea, especially relating to theories about his mother. The family section at the bottom may also need some changes, for example it would possibly be good to mention Clodius possible grandchildren.★Trekker (talk) 18:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- The ancestry reconstructions in Tatum 1999 are big trees on that I thought were confusing: the identity of ignota didn't seem too relevant so I didn't add it. I'll see if I can fit it in in an elegant fashion. As to the grandchildren, do you have any sources on it? None are listed in Zmeksal 2009 which is my go-to genealogical source. Ifly6 (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting - but my quick look got bogged down in the lead. It's long and somewhat repetitive; para 1 is a short summary of the article, paras 2-4 a slightly longer one. Para 2 is wordy; " and become a plebeian in order to be eligible for the plebeian tribunate. Adopted into an obscure plebeian family, he successfully stood as tribune of the plebs for 58 BC" could be shorter (eg became a plebeian by adoption into an obscure family so that he could become tribune of the plebs in 58 BC). Do all six laws need summarising there? In Para 3, "feuded with Titus Annius Milo" would be enough and even "a rival mob boss" rather than "who controlled a rival set of urban mobs". We only reconcile with opponents, so "Starting the year an opponent of Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus, he and his family reconciled with them to form a political alliance" could become "but reconciled with Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus to form a political alliance". I can't remember if the curia Hostilia was the senate house then; if so, I'd call it that instead - let's assume some ignorance on the part of our readers! "His body, brought back to Rome, was brought to the forum and then cremated in the curia Hostilia, causing the curia's destruction by fire." -> "His body was brought back to the forum in Rome and cremated in the senate house, which burnt down."? In para 4, simply "an agent of magnates such as" as the point is that older view hardly treats him as another magnate himself.
- Sorry for brief semiincoherence, HTH! NebY (talk) 18:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)