Caesar CXXXVII

Please do! It will be greatly appreciated. well - The Hellenistic world and the coming of Rome by Erich S. Gruen‏, chapters 15 to 17 The Hellenistic world from Alexander to the the Roman conquest by M. M. Austin‏, chapter 5 The Cambridge history of Judaism by William David, chapter 8 "Antiochus IV" Also there is - Edwin Robert Bevan, The House of Seleucus, 2 vol. (1902; reprinted 1966), considered as the primary source in English O. Morkolm, Antiochus IV of Syria (1966) - Seems to be a full biography And Judas Maccabaeus: The Jewish Struggle Against the Seleucids‏ by Bezalel Bar-Kochva‏

Indeed ! But I have read some books about his relationship with Rome and with Judaea, I will list if you want

You can try "Zenobia of Palmyra"‏ by Agnes Carr Vaughan, 1967 (250 pages, cover all you want to know)

I examined the image very close and I think I saw a Pussy cut, I did, I did !!!

Q. Hortensius was the first dicatator who died in office, in 287/6 .

Saw episode 12 of History channel's "Rise and fall..." . They made Ricimer the one person who was the most responsible, directly , for the fall of Rome . The sources are clear enough, what Goldsworthy has to say about it ?

Tucson Arizona.....can you believe ? I would pay Sir Paul 100 golden Sheqels for him to write a song mentioning my home town (Ramat Gan)

Not all Roman cognomina were hereditary, and often Romans would adopt cognomina as nicknames. Although Lucanus was born in Spain, he was brought to Rome at an early age for his education. He may have acquired the cognomen of "Lucanus" due to an association with the region of Lucania in southern Italy. Possibly even (and this is pure speculation), he may have assumed the cognomen of Lucanus for himself out of an affectation -- as Lucanus was a poet and the great Roman poet Horace had been born in a town on the borders of Lucania and Apulia, sometimes referring to himself as "Lucanus an Appulus anceps" on that account. -- Nephele Aha I say ! Did the practice of self adopting nicknames was a late Republic/early Empire one ? If you can, a list of Lucani ? It was a common cognomen, a rare one ? TIA (that is, Thanks in advance)

What can I say, I totaly agree ! Poor Valerianus...one thread of 1,000 and he got this

As a last remark, just check this thread; I never made any agument. You made the argument that Valerian can't be a true Licinius, but you didn't bring any source. You actually try to base your argument in the absence of sources!!! (ie, as no source proves it, it's impossible) You know, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I just pointed the faulty logic, and indeed it is; but that's also not my business. I did not made an argument. I made a suggestion . You made an argument based on nothing that Valerianus can be a descendant of the Licinnii with out a source . There is no possibility for that since the genealogy of the Licinnii is well known . See above . Edit : And btw, one can make an argument (if you want to call like that) even if the sources are silent , it is called argumentum ex silentio , So when I say that no source mentioned Valerianus Licinnian ancestry, I can argue that he han none such ancestry . Now, thanks to you I have just burned 3 houres .

Lucanus was the son of Mela, and the nephew of Seneca (the Younger). See Tacitus, Annals, 16.17: Mela, son of the same parents as Gallio and Seneca... He had too in his son Annaeus Lucanus a powerful aid in rising to distinction. -- Nephele O.K. Why the different cognomina ?

I agree . In addition, commaders started battels after a long period of pre fighting and fighting . Let us take Zama, it is too simple to say that Scipio smashed Hannibal . There were 16 years of figthing before the battle, 16 years that changed everything. Hannibal's army was not the army of 218-215 . His government manuverd him to a situation that he would never enterned by his own will . I consider Scipio's (less famed) successes in 210-203 not less important than his victory at Zama .

I can do better ! My ancestor is Topoiuyrfnhus 1245/23 IUT, who put the above protozoa in the Tethys Ocean. You can not dismiss the possibility...

At least, by pointing you a faulty assumption that would bias your prosographical analysis. BTW, it seems the less than 0.0001% was just an alternative way of expressing full impossibility (0% chance). And that's one impossibility that you can't sustain. Any family anywhere has the potential of leaving descendants; you may consider unlikely that Valerian came from bona fide Licinii, and you may be right; but from the content of this thread or the primary sources on this Emperor you simply can't reach such conclusion. Is that impossible in your logic? Really? I'm absolutely sure that my ascendants, your ascendants and Valerian ascendants were all alive by the time of Hammurabi, and there's a priori no reason why this king couldn't have been one of them (in fact, his polygamy would have made it particularly feasible). After all, about 1 in every 200 men in the World comes from a genetic lineage related to Gengis Khan. And of course, all known life came from a common ancestor that lived in the Paleoarchean, some 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago. let me get it - Do you have any source, ancient or (far better) modern about Valerianus being a descendant of the Licinnii or you just enjoy being argumentative ? You know, when one makes an argument, one must bring a source . If no one said that Valerianus was a descendant of M. licinius crassus the Triumvir is because there is no source about it . In your logic one can say that the Martians landed in the Sahara desert in 10,000 BCE but they did not record it . I must say, the possibility is there... Why not stay with what we have ? We heve no information about his connections with the Licinnii of the Republic so we must assume that he got his name by a different way . "It is disconcerting that no authoraty I have found seems willing to hazard a guess as to the idedtity of Valerian's father". (Gallienus by John Jefferson Bray) . Oh, let me correct my numbers, the chances are 0.00000856

So, in your logic, the descendants of Hamurabi are with us today but are not ATTESTED...and how that's helps us ?