Talk:Scipio Aemilianus

Scipio and the Gracchi
after his return to Rome he was publicly asked by the tribune Gaius Papirius Carbo what he thought of the fate of Gracchus, and replied that he was justly slain.

This is incorrect. Scipio's ambiguous answer was that if Gracchus had striven for the crown, he had been justly slain (see Theodor Mommsen, "The History of Rome", p.100 in the German edition). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.158.55.178 (talk) 09:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a very good essay on Scipio. I'm not happy with the sentence about Scipio's repentance being tardy. Two things: it wasn't Scipio's decision to annihilate Carthage (in fact the Senate sent a committee of ten to oversee the process); Polybius explicitly says it was not a repentance. I've just been doing some reading on this and Astin (A. E. Astin "Scipio Aemilianus", Oxford, 1967) includes a persuasive Appendix ("Scipio's Tears At Carthage") that argues that they were probably not tears of remorse. He concludes, "That Scipio was genuinely moved may be agreed without hesitation, as also that, doubltess amid a welter of emotions, of pride and triumph, or relief and joy, he felt sadness at the reminder that sooner or later all earthly things must pass . . ."

I'm not exactly sure how to replace the sentence, though. The drama of Scipio weeping is too good to leave out, but its meaning is hard to capture briefly. - Ward


 * Wasn´t there a story of him crying upon seing carthage destroyed and murmuming: .... someday Rome?


 * This quote is a decent paraphrase of what appears in Appian's Punic Wars, ch. 132. Polybius also references the famous lament of Scipio Africanus Minor, but in much less detail:: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.168.231 (talk) 08:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Poussin
The picture is in fact of a well-known story usually referred to as the "continence of Scipio". It concerns the capture of Cartago Nuova in Spain, when Scipio was "given" an attractive woman as a prize of war. He returned her to her fiance. It's a popular subject in 16-18th century art. Paul B 11:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Note: The reference is however incorrect; the Scipio depicted in the "continence of Scipio" is Scipio Major, not Scipio Aemilianus. Michael A


 * Yes, I'll move the image to Mr Major's page. Paul B 12:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Original name
Was his original name "Publius Aemilius Paullus" or "Lucius Aemilius Paullus" or what? This should be listed here, I think. john k 23:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It is not on record, because he was adopted very young, in his early teens, before he had any public role. According to the strict rules of Roman nomenclature he should have been Marcus Aemilius Paullus and his elder brother (Q. Fabius Maximus Aemilianus cos.145) would have been Lucius Aemilius Paullus, as the first two sons of L. Aemilius L. f. M. n. Paullus (cos.182, 168). What is on record, however, is that he was adopted by P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus the augur (the homonymous eldest son of the first Scipio to be called Africanus), and hence his name after the adoption was P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus Aemilianus, which could be abbreviated as the "Aemilian Scipio", or "Aemilian Scipio Africanus", but he was certainly NOT Scipio Aemilianus Afircanus, as he is named in this article. Please change it whoever has the control of these things. It is an embarassment. Appietas (talk) 07:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. He would have been considered the legally-recognized son of Scipio Africanus the Augur, and his previous cognomen would have been an afterthought. The same premise can be seen in Augustus' case. He became "Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus" following his adoption by the assassinated dictator, and reacted with marked anger against those who later refused to call him "Caesar." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.168.231 (talk) 09:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Overly fawning tone
The tone of this page seems a little too fawning and overpraising of the man. 69.223.135.87 11:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the last two paragraphs should be removed as they are praising Scipio rather than giving actual facts --Must WIN 01:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Numantius
Scipio's name ended with the title 'Numantius' given to him after the conquest and destruction of Numantia in North-East Spain. Is it possible that we change the title of the article so his full name is there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.56.107.162 (talk) 15:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

It is possible for you to give a source for this addition to his name? Appietas (talk) 07:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

too complimentary and biased - needs an overhaul. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.136.165.33 (talk) 01:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Pof
This article claims that scipio was a moderate. He was anything but. He was a conservative man. He followed the mos maiorum

Pov
This article claims that scipio was a moderate. He was anything but. He was a conservative man. He followed the mos maiorum — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.54.213 (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Scipio's reflections on the sack of Carthage
I removed this sentence which seems non-encyclopedic:

Scipio Aemilianus will be forever be associated with the destruction of Carthage. Mikeroetto (talk) 16:31, 30 April 2022 (UTC)