Template talk:Politics of ancient Rome

Comments
Brad stop talking: One may say that the various assemblies of the Roman people (contio, comitia centuriata etc.) and the senate fit under the heading poltical bodies. But Romnan law certainly cannot be called a political body in the same sense? Any proposals for an amendment of a more logic organization? --Thomas Ruefner 18:37, 14 May 2005 (UTC)


 * How about just politics, not political bodies? Kuralyov 21:40, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Picture not showing up
I dont see any history on this page in WH1 at saint andrew's school on the page could some one try and fix it!! In answer to Roman Law: Never certainly in the republic was Roman law a political body. Roman Law was all based on precidents dating back to the very foundation. No law book was written unless it was an open disscussion much simular to ciceros "The Laws". not even a constitutional law existed thus the reason the marius could strech such boundaries whith his reforms. No! certainly not Law was not a political body. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.30.24.36 (talk • contribs).

Edit request from Epistatic, 4 July 2010
editsemiprotected

This box does not work properly when embedded into a pdf: the pdf ends up containing the source code. Suggest using "exclude in print" over the whole template unless a solution is found to make the template actually work in the book tool.

Epistatic (talk) 07:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Robert Skyhawk (T C B) 23:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

alignment in bottom section
Despite valiant efforts of the template's creators, the bottom section ("Precedent and law") is still swampy. I mean it exhibits unsatisfactory alignment. Inept with formatting as I am, all my experiments have failed; it seems to me that both senatus consultum and senatus consultum ultimatum ought to get its own line, with "Roman Law" remaining at the top as it is, and the other elements paired, but damned if I can figure out how to make it work. The verticality of senatus consultum ultimatum is out of keeping with the horizontal arrangement of all other phrases in the table. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2015- Assemblies
Please add in, somewhere:


 * heading7 = Assemblies
 * content7 =


 * Century
 * Curiate
 * Plebian
 * Tribal

"7" may of course be changed to whatever the appropriate number will be for the most context-sane position.

Frederik Sunesen (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Stickee (talk) 23:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2016
395 AD, NOT BC 151.237.22.7 (talk) 15:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 19:02, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Collapsible template
Is it possible to make this template collapsible? It takes a lot of space on a page. T8612 (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Split
I'm thinking of splitting this template into two templates:
 * Politics of the Roman republic
 * Politics of the Roman empire

The names in the latter might be the same in a lot of cases but the political culture of the republic is very different from that of the empire. You have things like the quaestiones perpetuae which are irrelevant in the latter period, consuls who are just honorary titles, etc. After the split, what would be left here would probably be the timeline with the names of the things that survived it all (senate, consul) and the biggest hits (senate, king, consul, dictator, emperor). Also pinging T8612. Ifly6 (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Why is Consular tribune even put under Extraordinary magistrates? Ifly6 (talk) 02:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Similarly why is Rex (Ancient Rome) under Extraordinary magistrates? Ifly6 (talk) 14:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)