Talk:SPQR - Knowledge (XXG)

2807:

would think after the manufacture of so many "vexilloids" the Romans would have known what they are. Not so. It is of recent innovation. So, I switched to vexillum and vexilla. Surely, I thought, I ought to find plenty of evidence of Roman troops marching proudly forward behind handsome red vexilla that said "SPQR." Unfortunately, not one. I had to stop after a while. It seems that the vexilla originally were lower-unit flags. There were some inscriptions but they were the numbers of their legions. The corresonding signa did not feature inscriptions. So I brought up all those wonderful pages of elaborate, brightly designed flags with SPQR on them under images on the Internet. Beautiful page, but all of it recent. Then I realized that the SPQR was far from dead. It lives on in the imaginations of people who love processions, parades, and huge colored pieces of cloth snapping smartly in the wind. Well, I said to myself, we have to decide what this article is about. Is it the modern or is it the ancient? I had to admit, there is very little to describe and prove the ancient. So, I would have to say, grinchy though they are, if this article purports to be about the ancient SPQR, there is little substantiation in it. Frankly, I'm heartbroken myself. That red vexillum with the gold SPQR is just too beautiful to give up. This is obviously a major project. I can't play the grinch right now because I am working on another major-effort type one. But, I felt I should throw my support behind the edit and source requests. Maybe we need more than one article, SPQR and modern uses of SPQR. Good luck.

3088:: the literal meaning is therefore "The Roman Senate and People", and it's helpful to explain that to readers who may wish to be guided word-by-word through the translation; but the freer alternative, "The Senate and People of Rome", is very commonly (perhaps predominantly) found in the real world, and we should acknowledge that as well. There's also the fact to consider that, in modern colloquial English, "Rome" most commonly relates to the city, whereas "Roman" is used to allude to the wider Republic, the Empire, or a quasi-ethnicity: the overtones of the two translations may therefore be slightly different. For both those reasons I think it's beneficial to give both the literal and the free translation in the "Translation" section, which I think should stand as it is. Whether we need both translations in the lede sentence is another matter: personally I don't think it does any harm, but I wouldn't be too bothered if the consensus was to cut one or the other. 2087:

understand it. I thought it was some interesting additional detail about the use of the formula. On the whole however I see it has little effect on the article. If you find find these things puzzling, my boy, take a course. If you want some instant answers there is enough grammar on Knowledge (XXG) now so that you can find the information you desire. Let's just leave it out for now, as the gist of the article is legalistic and governmental rather than grammatical. As to your comment,I don't see any logic in that at all. So what, and what has that to do with what I said? I say, gosh, the formuala can be in the ablative absolute. You say, by golly, that is not surprising, so let's take it out. I suppose you did not like the statement about the bully language and did not wish to say so and therefore threw together some kangaroo reasons. Too contorted for me. I like the direct approach.

1126:

not spoken at all for most of the Republic. They were like legal lingo, containing many expressions from a former brand of English that are little understood or used now. SPQR is not archaic, but it is a formula meaning "this is the government talking." The man who chiseled or wrote that expression was not an author or a legislator, was not performing an act of composition, was not even writing anything, did not feel free to interpret or rephrase or disagree about the grammar. The officials who told him to put it there were more or less in the same position. Nor did the senators or magistrates do any composition on it. It was a rubber stamp, you know? The Romans abbreviated when there was no question of what the abbreviation meant (as there is today). C. meant Caius, Q. meant Quintus, S.P.Q.R. meant Senatus Populusque Romanus.

991:

Romans) by Oskar Jäger, honorary profesor of the university of Bonn. I have the 10th edition (1913), it was originally printed in 1835 but subsequently revised around 1900. It doesn´t have a ISBN (I guess they didn´t have it back then). It is a bit dated, he tends to accept and to follow the views of the old roman sources (he defends the old Roman view that Cleopatra was a unworthy woman - "ein unnütziges weib" who vilely seduced the weak Marc Antony), but on the whole it is a good book, and he is very thourough in his facts. Hmm, I am going to include him in the references. But if you search closely here and there, there is plenty of evidence for this view. Read the article.

1470:

speculating what S.P.Q.R. might stand for. Well, he needn't speculate. He could have just looked it up in the Latin dictionary, if he had any Latin. If he didn't, why is he presuming to write this article? I'd say, only write about that of which you have SOME knowledge. Second, never write off the top of your head. Do your homework first. Third, don't guess. It's a big temptation, I know, but don't do it. Truth is stranger than fiction. So, as a peer review, I'd inscribe on the paper, if it were a paper, "Needs more work!" But, I wouldn't expect to see it back. In Knowledge (XXG) technique, it needs references! But I doubt you will find any.

1133:, which is at the intermediary level. Article 48 of the Introduction says "-que couples words to form one whole." One whole may therefore take a singular adjective. As for the suggestion that it is Quirites or Quiritium, that is patently wrong. There is no inscriptional evidence to support it. Then you would have three conjoined items without a conjunction, one a plural, modified by a singular adjective. If you suppose the genitive, you have some pretty peculiar prose, "the senate and people of the spearmen." But I thought the people were the spearmen. As for spearmen, you have no sources here. I doubt if it means that. Who says it does? 2108:

OR senatus | populusque romanus. The latter choice has the disadvantage of excluding the senate from being the Roman people and I doubt if that is a good idea at all. Populus appears to be of Etruscan origin and the early senate were probably persons of Etruscan descent. But to be perfectly honest after so many billion repetitions of the formula I doubt if anyone knew of these supposed distinctions at all or would have cared in the slightest. The English mind faced with the necessity to translate and to be highly scientific seems to need to ponder these things. Let's just leave it as is, hey?

1716:

number. Think of it as (senatus populusque)Romanus, rather than senatus (populusque Romanus). If it were only the Roman people and no mention of whose senate it is; it could be anyone's senate. Even Carthage, their worst enemy had a senate, and without Romanus applying to both senatus and populus, the sentence would be illogical. Anyone who doesn't speak Latin should not change this page to say "The senate and people of Rome". I have heard it way too many times from ignorant people out on the street, but to see it written in an encyclopaedia is terrible. Romanus IS NOT A GENITIVE NOUN!!!

1690:

belonging to Rome. The people do not belong to to rome, they are not "of Rome". They are Roman. Do you reference them as Romans or People of Rome? Romans. Do you address Americans as American, or "of America"? American. To say "I am an American" is indeed far more potent than to say "I am of America". Both the terms American, and Roman imply a depth of culture, and nationalism for the people, rather than being simply residents, or citizens. Roman denotes an emotional connection between one and one's country. To call the Romans "of rome", instead of Roman is a despicable understatement.

2402:

centuries later? It is not necessary for the phrase Res Publica/republic to originate at the same time as the phrase Senatus Populus Que Romanus (or varients). In fact, do we have any evidence that the Romans in 509BC used the the phrase Res Publica to describe their post-regal form of government? I repeat my question, what is the oldest *surviving* inscription or coin to show the SPQR formula? 2nd or 3rd Century BC? More recent than that? Jon Jeffery, Leiden

447: 694:

was made so by SPQR and only the government could use it. Everyone understood that and no one was free to use the expression privately, any more than a private citizen can sign "the Congress of the United States." "Are behind us" is unnecessary and untrue. "Are us" would be better, but as I say, there was no argument or misunderstanding or misinterpretation about the expression. Everyone knew just exactly what it meant and that it was worth your head to misuse it.

429: 361: 340: 74: 53: 1766:

while "of Rome" suggests the city state. I think "Senate and People of Rome" is the normal translation, but all of that is clearly OR and irrelevant. Literally, there is no difference between the translations as long as the adjective applies to both nouns, since "Roman" is defined as "of Rome". I don't really care which way it is stated, but the adjective should apply to both nouns, which it didn't in the version I changed. --

1485:

something. The Knowledge (XXG) trangressions are that it presents original theories; to wit, the author's off-the cuff speculations of what he thinks SPQR might mean. There are no references to any published work online or paper. There is no question at all about what SPQR means. Moreover this section only repeats what the "translation" section said, which I excised. It's time for something else more accurate to be said.

1161:

by the people thus helping to appease the pleibeians and perhaps other countries they would invade and conquer convincing the people that they are freeing those they invade by putting them in control of their country. not unlike how we might hear about spreading democracy thus putting a positive spin on invasion by making it seem as though attacking a country and imposing our ideals on them would be freeing them.

457: 1973: 22: 272: 251: 167: 146: 1019:

more ancient) and I thought that it would be simply better to have all of them in this article and explain the value of each of them. It would be the same than to write an article about the "christian gospels", then restrict that article only to the four official ones, while simply ignoring the other 30 of them because they are not well-known and official = gnostic.

2483:

Roman. Because we are one, so to speak. Well thats the original meaning, but latin spoken remember, is vulgar latin, it is different to how you write latin, which is classical latin. Just the same in modern English, how i talk English, is not the same as how i wrote it at university, or even how i write/type here. What can i say, humans are lazy, me included.

177: 1745:: The Senate and the Roman People) or something similar to get across both viewpoints. In addition, "Of Rome" (at least to me) seems to imply more of a "city only" feel, meaning only Rome immediately, whereas "Roman people" feels like it encompasses the Empire in general, whether one was a citizen in Gaul, or Africa, or Rome itself. 1118:, always was, always has been, never was anything else, never was questioned, never was misunderstood. It is attested on an uncounted number of inscriptions in metal, on stone, on statues, on buildings, in representations, what have you, and it is always the same. There is no doubt about what SPQR stands for or what it means either. 2868:...the SPQR abbreviation and Spartan helmet are not included in the league’s database of hate symbols. Pitcavage said while there are examples of their use by white supremacists, or in the case of the helmet by antigovernment or firearms activists, they are used “just as much or more often by nonextremists than extremists.” 861:"Senatus Populique Quirites Romae" would really be the proper form, I believe. Actually, it's a great translation. Women, children, slaves etc. were no part of the S.P.Q.R., because they were no Roman Citizens (Cives Romani), they could, however, be Roman People. (Romani, Populus Romae, Populus Romanus) 2471:

For example. Pueris puellīsque, Boys "and" Girls. Now this is a far more powerful than Pueris et Puellis. The former is inclusive, while the later is descriptive. Concilium coetusque, Council and Union. Concilium, to council, or in council. English, conciliation. to meet again. to meet in union. Base

2454:

Quirites, if you used that word, (from the time of the King's), to describe Romans in their time period, you were insulting them. If you uttered this word, you were in trouble. As it describes the one, over the many in roman parlance, and later became slang used by Romanus enemies. But yes it was the

2362:

Does anyone know the earliest extant example of the SPQR formula? Populus originally had military connotations (i.e. the citizens when under arms). An example ref (of many) "There are various indications that populus has a military connotation; the verb populari mean to sack or destroy; the ancient

2320:

Why is Italian relevant at all? In French original, Obelix says "Ils sont fous ces romains" and taps his forehead, "toc toc toc". The Romans are of course depicted as speaking Latin, not Italian. So if this extra joke can be found only in Italian translation, or if English translation uses an Italian

2196:

Also note that in Latin you do not use 'of Rome' in this sense - Latin always uses an adjective (whereas English allows either). So a correct translation of 'the people of Rome' would be 'populus Romanus'. However, 'the Roman people' is a safer English translation, because it translates directly, and

2173:

2. This would be a weak argument to accept, I think. The constitution of the Republic comprised the Senate and the Roman (i.e citizens) people, together with elected magistrates (who would then go on to the Senate). To talk of the Senate and the Roman People meant the Republic. In terms of grammar, I

1919:

I am somewhat confused, acording to the Historical context section, Populus Romanus is a phrase refering to the government of Rome, so does that mean that Senatus Populusque Romanus mean; The Senat AND the People of Rome, with "People of Rome" being a fixed phrase used to describe the government, and

1740:

First, it certainly is literally translated as "The Senate and the Roman People," as Romanus is clearly nominative. Secondly, one of the beauties of Latin is that since Senatus, Populus and Romanus are all in the nominative, "Romanus" can easily be transferred/applied to both words. Thus, something

1599:

So then doesn't this support the banner being used to lead 'Roman' troops from outside the province of Lazio into battle? Augustus attempted to destroy Caesar's Republic by making Roman Citizens focus on their differences rather than their unity. Its as if he created the military-industrial complex

759:

Each one is logical, although in the second, I would say Romae is not possessive but locative. That is, not that the senate and people belong to Rome—during the Republic, my guess is that the Romans saw it the other way round: Rome belonged to the senate and people—but that the senate and people were

2998:

This is why you americans are a cancer upon the face of the earth. SPQR can still be seen everywhere in Rome. I am roman, I have it tattooed in my hand. Am I a "white" i.e ethnically european american? You people are insane and your insanity must not be indulged. If you think your "race" is superior

2806:

I looked at all the tags on this article and my first thought was, omigosh, some grinch has been getting even with someone by tagging this popular article to death with unnecessary tags. So I started in on the very first tag. After a few hours I had not got very far. First of all is "vexilloid." You

2482:

Romanus, latin for Roman. Cognomen, Latin plural cognomina is "together with". Hence. SPQR Senatus Populusque Romanus. Senate and the People of Rome. (it's closer meaning in (modern)Vulgar english is "The Senate and the People that are Roman".) But it's meaning is you are of Rome. Therefore you are

2107:

The two translations as currently stated are fine and I hope they are left that way. Nothing at all is to be gained by overanalysis of the grammar typically by first-year Latin students (I presume). The current translations reflect that the words can be grouped two ways: senatus populusque | romanus

1765:

Disagree on two points. Firstly, to make the adjective apply to both nouns in English, it would have to be "the Roman Senate and People", not "the Senate and the Roman People". Secondly, the subjective impression is the other way round for me - "Roman" sounds like a geographic or ethnic description,

1619:

Well I finished with the accuracy of the thing. Now there is something to copyedit. I'm going to move on however and leave the humor up to someone else to edit. When you finish, take off the copyedit template. If I see the excised material back again without sources and examples I'm going to put the

1160:

i'm no expert in latin but it seems to me that the meaning would make more sense and seems to be to me, as italian and spanish are, to mean "Roman peoples' senate". this seems to me to make more sense in the type of propaganda they might use. as it would emphasise that rome belongs and is controlled

1150:

Meanwhile, you afficionados, I appreciate your zeal. I'm only saying, you need to know something about it to write the article. Why don't you fellows work on something easier or more in your line for a while? Let me get some material together, if I am going to; however, I am sure there must be other

990:

That is without a doubt, the more famous one, for it was used by the middle and late Roman republic and by the Roman empire and as such apppears in almost all the monuments and famous documents. Ok, searched and found my main source for the : "Geschichte der Römer" - (eng. tranlation: History of the

693:

Hello total. The expression is the official signature of the Roman Republic, of which the Senate and the Comitia Centuriata were the governing bodies. The Comitia were basically electoral. The Senate was deliberative, legislative and executive. The magistrates obeyed its decrees. Any official notice

682:

I have always been under the impression that while the literal translation was, "the senate and people of rome", there was an implied "are behind us" that is not directly stated. This would correspond with the use of the phrase by the legions. It would not make sense for the military to claim that

2973:

I followed the references to something called the SPLC in the U.S. The material provided is less than convincing. It consists of random posts of people on the internet and claims this as something substantial. Also after looking into the SPLC it seems to be embroiled in politics. What about waiting

2516:

were the original source of the letter Q for whatever reason (the Quirites being a separate ethnic group, a term for Romans themselves as suggested in the Knowledge (XXG) article, etc.). Before people simply revert any mention of Q standing for anything else besides 'que', some real homework needs

1469:

The reason I effected this removal are as follows. I'm sorry, I don't mean to step on toes, but this information is 100% false. Anyone with a classics background can immediately see that the author made it up ad hoc. Second, the author never talks about translation at all. He spends the whole space

791:

Perhaps a more accurate modern translation of the original meaning would currently be: "The Senate and the Citizens of the People of Rome." - "Senatus Quiritesque Populi Romae", which regretably would change the initialism into "SQPR". However, since word order is secondary to conjugation in Latin,

748:

Most sources report Romanus, and I personally agree with them. "Romani" plural would make sense if it were referred to both senate and people. Since at the time there was only one Senate, there was no need to specify that besides the people also the senate was in fact roman. As for the translation,

583:

Translated as, "The Senate and the People of Rome". Rome is in the genitive case, and is second declension, so the proper ending is -i. If the word were first declension it would be -ae (which it might be, but I'm pretty sure it's not). I'm pretty confident that a lot of website have this wrong.

2475:

So que, links two words together, which is how we get "Senate and the people". It's not exclusive. It's suppose to be inclusive. Therefore Senate and the People, Senatus populusque. They are saying you cannot have one without the other. There is not meaning without both, for example. Senate is of,

2382:

Publica, The Public ...all of the people, citizens and non. Populus, The People, those citizens able to bear arms in defence of Rome. ie: those counted on the Military Rolls. First used as far as we know, just after Tarquinus(younger) was deposed. So at the start of the Republic. Hence re Publica,

1146:

Well the bottom line is that this article needs attention by a classicist. A total rewrite is in order. I like the pictures, by the way. The trivia can stay as trivia. I may decide to work on this article next. We need some sources here. The last time I saw the article it had numerous requests for

1125:

First of all, this is a standard piece of inscriptional prose. As such it has no grammar, it is not inflected, cannot be altered, is not living prose. That is what you put to sign with the government's authority and that is that. There are many such pieces, some reflecting archaic Latin, which was

1018:

Uhh, have you read the article? It is very clearly explained that "version" is the most famous one, since it was used since a very early stage of the republic and continued to be used under the empire. Despite all that, there are other versions (some of them are simply bad translations, others are

755:

I use both "Senatus Populusque Romanus" and "Senatus Populusque Romae," as the mood suits me. I grew up assuming the former, but the latter—in which Romanus is a singular, nominative, first declension adjective—seems more economical in English. (Somehow I doubt the Romans worried about how English

2582:

Could somebody explain why it's "The Senate and People of Rome" rather than "The Roman Senate and People"? Doesn't the agreement between *senatus*, *populus*, and *romanus* suggest that *romanus* is an adjective that modifies the nouns *senate* and *people*? In other words, if it's "of Rome," why

2493:

There are untold numbers of written records, and engravings, with the same words from roman times, all the Romanus cannot be wrong. Espeically when they placed such an importance on exact understanding of their language. And if you could not express yourself in the full context of Latin, you were

2337:

Ah! It is the Italian translation. 'Some translations have actually added local humour: In the Italian translation, the Roman legionnaires are made to speak in 20th century Roman dialect and Obelix's famous "Ils sont fous ces romains" ("These Romans are crazy") is translated as "Sono pazzi questi

1689:

Literally, SPQR would translate to "The Senate and the People Roman". Flipping the words Roman and People (yealding The Senate and the Roman People) has no effect whatsoever on the meaning, whilst translating Romanus as a genitive does. It implies that the people are indeed not Roman, but instead

940:

Hmmm, I have to check but I first found in a book (written 1913) of a german scholar. But I found it mentioned in other more recent books. Before I began to reform this article, it was allready here but I expanded it. As for the fact you never read it before, I have to ask you. what books do you

3114:

A thousand times this. The translation section is fine. GrindtXX isn't bothered, but I say the lead is fine too and doesn't need to be changed. It gives the literal translation (yay, learning a little bit of Latin grammar!) and the popular, though technically grammatically incorrect, translation

1110:

You know, I have never put a template on an article but after reading the pure nonsense of this article I think I may well do that, the one that says, the accuracy of this article is disputed. First of all, SPQR is not a literary phrase to be interpreted or translated as you think fit. It was an

2466:

When we want to "and" something in latin, we generally use "et". But when two words need to be "and linked", or need to be linked in way to understand the first word has no meaning without the second, we -que. Que is what we call a enclitic, it links two words. eg: joins them together to obtain

2216:

My Question: As I understand it SPQR first represented a standard of Manhood by the original Romans. Once established it became the phrase to represent the Senate and People of Rome. The word Senutas first meant Honorable and Fatherly men of the family and the People of Rome. The definition was

1715:

I just changed it to "The Roman senate and people". It definitely isn't "The senate and people of Rome" since Romanus isn't a genitive noun. I think it was wrong to suggest that Romanus only describes populus; why shouldn't it describe senatus as well? senatus and populus have the same case and

1136:

Romanus/Romae. Romanus is used in expressions of this type; e.g., civis Romanus, "Roman citizen." The locative, Romae, means actually at the city of Rome. It wasn't "the senate and the people at Rome", as the people were not all at Rome and anyway they were not interested in the location of the

734:

Yes, "Romani" would either mean "Romans" (nominative plural) or "of (a) Roman" (genitive singular), neither of which make any sense there. I'm changing it to "Romae" to match the translation given in the following sentence and to be consistent with (i.e. be one of) the most common possibilities

1484:

The only thing the skeptics are pondering is this section of the article. Bottom line: it needs work by a person with some knowledge of the events and customs, or by one willing to do the homework to find out. I'll be gradually working on it if no one else does, at least until it actually says

2401:

Hi, thanks for the reply, but the definition of Populus you give is a modern one, using the known later usage of the word in Latin. What are the reasons that you think that it was first used just after Tarquinus the Proud was deposed? Or that it's meaning then was the same as it was several

2086:

Well, Anderson, it was intended to say what it does in fact say. What it says, it says. The fact that you don't understand it means you know no Latin. If you were to read a mathematical formula knowing no mathematics you would not then be justified in complaining to the world that you did not

860:

If you add "que" to a Latin word, it applies to thát particular word. So, "bellumque pax" should be "pax bellumque/bellum paxque". I think "Senatus Populi Quiritesque Romae" would have been quite wrong.. "The Senate of the People and the Roman Citizens of Rome" sounds as plain nonsense to me.

3239:

There seems to be a lot of confusion over the translation of a pretty unremarkable initialism in Latin into English. I think the reason for this might be because most of the people posting here don't speak a romance language, and so don't understand how adjectives are differently ordered in

1812:

Ian, I must advise you that you're absolutely incorrect about the "of Rome" being a "long-established" translation. I am a classicist by training and a member of the academic community. I must sincerely urge you not to be obstinate to this point. There is absolutely no benefit whatsoever to

1726:

I don't think anyone is under the impression that "Romanus" is a noun. However, most people left word for word translation behind in first year language classes. "The senate and people of Rome" is long-established as the translation which best conveys the sense of the original. Wiktionary's

2954:

I really don't understand your objection. Are you saying that the 21st century isn't part of history? The cited sources are all anti-far-right in their outlook, but have documented the adoption of the Roman initialism in a neutral way, and the phenomenon deserves mention in this article.

2181:

I would add that the use of "People of Rome" is likely a rewording of the correct translation for effects of added grandeur in English, without understanding that "the Roman People" had a significant political meaning to the Romans, and did not simply mean people in the general sense.

1785:

It doesn't matter whether YOU prefer "of Rome" or "Roman." What does matter is that Romanus undoubtedly means Roman. It's an adjective. Any Classicist will immediately translate it that way. It's not at all correct to translate it as "of Rome," even if you don't see a big difference.

2511:

This entire discussion is pointless unless someone wants to actually do the work and investigate and cite some sources beyond simply pointing at surviving documents and inscriptions and saying, "Look here!" Scholarly sources have been cited at different points that suggest that the

1029:

This is an interesting topic. What if the SPQR construction was just something Augustus manufactured from, say SPQG? To me that makes more sense because it is the kind of flag Ceasar could have had non-Roman soldies join the battles in gaul, without getting reinforced from rome.

817:

to translate it. I was under the impression that the "que" had to be attached to the more important word in the phrase: "the Citizens", but notice: "It wouldn't be elegant Latin, but understood.". I am afraid you have to ask him or a other user who knows latin to be really sure.

763:

I'm not by any means a Latin scholar, and I have no sources to cite; this is only my two cents' worth. (Keep the change.) I guess we'll never know for sure unless some definitive evidence comes to light, or a twenty-two hundred-year old Roman steps forward to set us straight.

541:). Since flags did not actually exist at the time of the Roman Republic, I don't see why this article has a flag illo anyway as it's anachronistic. I shall therefore comment out the image line, while a decision can be made whether to remove the flag from Knowledge (XXG). -- 2557:

Well, can it be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no doubt? As far as I can see, the scholarly sources presented so far have been ignored. The 'que' advocates should at least make an effort to demonstrate why those sources are should not be considered.

2658:

suggesting that the last coins to use SPQR are from the reign of Constantine I. Is that correct? It would be nice for the article to include information about how long the SPQR formula was used in the west, and whether it was adopted to any extent in the east.

2022:

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on

2630:

I already apologised for rolling back what was clearly a good faith edit without comment - it just seemed to me that this had already been done to death. The normal translation and the word-for-word translation are both already covered in the article.

1164:"the roman peoples' senate" just seems to me to fit with the text's meaning particularly if you look at how que is used in spanish and italian and french, no doubt not a coincidence, and at the type of message rome would wish to print on everything. 2913:", on the grounds that it's "incorrect info". I have no idea whether that's true or not, but we do include a photo of a manhole cover in Rome, from the style certainly post-WW2, that displays the initialism. Can anyone cast any more light on this? 1741:

like "The Roman Senate and the Roman People." Now, clearly it doesn't need to be written like that, as that sense is readily apparent. However, perhaps the header of the article should include (in parenthesis or however) something like: (

1395:. This version started to be used since the earliest stages of the Roman Republic, and continued to be used later during the Roman Empire. As such, it appears in most of the famous monuments and documents. A fine example of this is the 1111:

official phrase, the official signature of the Roman Replublic, which the emperors chose to retain to make their institution more palatable to the people, who were used to seeing their name plastered on official documents of any medium.

2826:

Perhaps long overdue (I see a comment about this dating back to 2010), I intend to add a subsection about the use of SPQR by white supremacist groups, before Popular culture. Please feel free to propose citations or to jump in when I'm

2305:"Sono Pazzi Questi Romani" better translates into "These Romans are Crazy" rather than "Those Romans are Crazy." "Questi" always means "these." "Those" would be "Quelli" in Italian. I went ahead and edited the page to reflect that. 1953:

shows a dagger hanger from WWII emblazoned with SPQR. Mussolini certainly used the mark on fascist items, and the page itself makes the claim that this was for propaganda purposes... but that's probably not enough for a valid cite.

729:

NB re reading of SPQR above - is it not romanus - meaning "Roman" rather than "of Rome", which would be romae? Isn't Romani nom plural romanus - "Romans" - not making any sense at all in context ("senate and people and romans")?

1011:

I'm not sure why the author of the SPQR wiki stated that SPQR meaning is disputed. If you go to the forum in Rome and take a look at the Temple of Jupiter there are columns and then the facade above it. The facade clearly says:

2217:

expressed by there word "VIRTUS" or in English "Virtues". What do you think and know about this? I got this idea from a book I read a long while ago entitled Caesar and Christ by Will Durant. I do not know were he got it from?

893:

PS: I will replace "Senatus Quiritesque Populi Romae" for "Senatus Populique Quirites Romae" as the more correct translation for "The Senate and the Citizens of the Roman People" in 1 week if there is no challenge to its

1920:

the Senate being a seprate entity from that? Or does Senatus Populusque Romanus simply mean; the Roman Senate and People, as in one entity? I think the article is somewhat unclear on this, and I'm kind of currious.

2999:

you are insane. If you think the SPLC gets to say every lamp post in Rome is "racist" you are insane. I'm deleting it because your post-trump insane dialectic is insane and deserves no place in adult discussion.

1192:

Some possible questions rise with this, as with any translation. Initialisms are of debatable value and accuracy, as the meanings of words are subject to both change and complexity. Its meaning was probably of

720:

Why is this labeled puerile? I don't get it. I've heard reference to "The law of small profits, quick returns" but i don't understand why it's considered puerile.. or am i just not appreciating some joke here?

2472:

english, to try and find common ground. General use of -que in roman times was most often in the context of a phrase. Plus plusque, More and More. ei: Plus and Plus. It must be taken together to gain meaning.

1682:

The fact that the SPQ expands to The Senate and the People is undebated. Romanus translates directly to "Roman". It is in the nominative case, and as such should not be translated with the helping word "of".

411: 2133:

2. A translation as "The Senate and People of Rome" should only be regarded as accurate if we recognize that "of Rome" denotes constitution (of the political entity, by both the Senate and the people),

477:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a 1129:

que. Que is que, the postpositive conjunction. If you are interested in learning some Latin (I highly suggest it, considering your interests), let me recommend to you Mountford's Bradley's Arnold's

322: 562: 2019:

is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Knowledge (XXG) policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

3243:

The correct translation of Senatus Populus que Romanus is "The Popular Roman Senate"("popular" meaning "of the people") or, more naturally in English, as "(The) Senate of the Roman People" .

2974:

for the dust to settle in the U.S. for a few years and reflecting a bit before adding it to 21st century history. History is little hard to define when your in the thick of it in my opinion.

771: 3349: 2286:

It looks like that list of modern cities that have followed the same pattern could get very long, maybe it should be spun off/removed and only a few more famous ones left in this article. --

312: 2612:

I just stumbled on this page, made the edit, and it was immediately reverted by Ian Dalziel. It looks like its his way or the viam. Sure. Fine. Whatever. Translate the phrase incorrectly.--

3204:

is a literal translation. You cannot preserve both the word order and the meanings. The first translation is awkward in English and furthermore the second is the standard translation.

3354: 604:

I seem to recall that for a long time Liverpool adopted a similar motto, branding things in the name of the Senate and People of the City of Liverpool. Anyone know anything about this?

3344: 2655:

The article gives some information about when SPQR came into use, and says that it continued to be used into the empire. When and how did it die out? I have only found a forum post

1862:. I would like to know if it is well-known enough to have its own page. I would be able to provide enough information for a short article, as we play on it at the end of our Saturday 1147:

sources on it. Now it has been rewritten and the requests are not there, but neither are any sources. And, the article is wrong. I hope the author does not think he took care of it.

478: 288: 3374: 3369: 2236:

Did the Romans ever write SPQR without dots? I don't whether to markup SPQR or SPQR, so I mention here that I think the Romans did never write abbreviations without dots. ... said:

1679:

I figured that my change in translation from "The Senate and the People of Rome" to "The Senate and the Raman People" warranted extra discussion than the small explanation I gave.

1143:

Apart from these little problems the author keeps saying that P and Q, for example, are disputed. Of yeah? By whom? Knowledge (XXG) editors who don't know any Latin do not count.

2486:

So SPQR, S for Senate, P for the People who can defend Rome & Romans, Q because it tells us one is useless without the other, and R becaue they are of Rome, therefore Roman.

2366:

If the phrase truly dates to the early years of the republic, originally it would have meant the Senate and the Army of Rome, or perhaps the Senate and soldier-citizens of Rome.

2127:

Do I understand (after reading all of the above, and with several years of Latin education , but NOT a lot of Republican history) that the following express the conclusion here?

1114:

As to the grammar it is beyond me how people can admit to knowing no Latin in one sentence and then give pronouncements on the grammar in the next. The expression is undoubtedly

1137:

senate here any more than when we say Washington meaning the government we are trying to say the government is located at Washington. Some is, some isn't. Who cares where it is.

2462:

Well, we all seem to understand Senate. Now lets explain the second part. Populusque. Populus is easy, "the People". re Publica, re populus, concerning the Public / People.

1151:

classics majors out there. Take a hand, you classicists, promulgate the knowledge for the public. Don't let classics die or fall into the hands of those who know no latin.

284: 279: 256: 2710: 2750: 2746: 2732: 473: 434: 1462:

meaning "of Rome". This version has the great merit that its English translation is simply the better sounding one, but its historical accuracy is highly dubious. The

283:, a group of contributors interested in Knowledge (XXG)'s articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our 615:

Reply to above -- this formula is very common in Dutch cities -- I certainly have a photo of SPQG (in Groningen), and I've seen it in various cities I've visited

1519:

of the Roman Republic. A free Roman male who had all the rights and fulfilled his duties, who was able and willing to fight for the republic and the people was a

2467:

meaning. It is used as a, for want of a better explaination, a more powerful "And". Perhaps better saying, it is inclusive, rather than exclusive or descripive.

584:

The "-us" ending is used for the nominative case, which would be the subject of a sentence, for example. I had switched it, but I think I'll revert the page.

575:

I believe that the correct Latin translation is not Senate and People of Rome, which would be Senatus Populusque Romae, but rather Roman Senate and People.

2932:

Surprised to see heading 'White supremacy' in what should be a historically informative article. Current U.S. cultural bits and pieces should be removed.

2363:

term for dictator (in the sense of leader of the army) was magister populi; and in the Carmen Saliare, we find pilumnoe poploe (pilum-bearing people...)"

233: 2000:, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with 1997: 1696: 2024: 2016: 2012: 1989: 3334: 223: 1686:

In order to translate the phrase to "The Senate and the People of Rome" SPQR would have to stand for "Senatus Populusque Romae", which it doesn't.

128: 827:

That's not the point of the suffix 'que' at all. Que simply means 'and'. So adding it to a word...like this: bellumque pax..means "war and peace".

1055:

For what it's worth, I was always taught "Senatus Populus Quorum Romanus", but I can't find this version listed in the article or this talk page

3364: 3319: 401: 118: 2028: 3339: 3329: 3006: 2584: 3246:

Spanish and Italian are descended from Latin, and SPQR would be "el senado popular romano" (Spanish)/"il senato populare romano" (Italian).

199: 3255: 3247: 2981: 2939: 2343: 2322: 2183: 2071:

I do not understand what this is intended to say. An ablative absolute with a compound subject and a plural verb is not at all surprising.

1557: 523: 3044:

Why not, indeed. If you read the preceding sections, you will see that many editors are convinced that translation must be word-by-word.

683:

they are the senate and people of rome, but it would be a fair claim that the senate and people are behind or supporting the military. --

3359: 3324: 2367: 1793: 1700: 377: 3314: 3058:...maybe use only the "proper" translation then. It just seems redundant to keep both if they don't really convey different meanings. 2711:

https://web.archive.org/20110927154602/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/65DC8039-12C4-4AC4-8DAD-16F1608E99B7/0/cityarms.PDF

2409: 1820: 622: 566: 775: 537:

I notice that an anonymous user has put a copyright notice on the SPQR flag, asserting it belongs to "NovaRoma, Inc." (apparently at

94: 830: 2714: 1894: 2287: 1318:- "citizen". This initialism is given by Castiglioni and Mariotti, authors of a renowned Latin dictionary, among other scholars. 2054:

In more official contexts therefore Senatus Populusque Romanus was used for signing-off purposes. The singular was used for the

190: 151: 1045: 33: 1494:

PS Here is the removed material. Author, you are not deciding what the best way to say this is, the Romans did that already.

703:

My (probably wrong) understanding from my Latine classes was that it meant " the senate and people of Rome"... just my 2c.--

368: 345: 2222: 643: 81: 58: 3115:(yay, learning that good translations don't have to be literal!). Readers are not confused or upset by this. Let it go. 1749: 2583:

isn't it in the genitive (*romani*, of Rome), rather than the nominative (*romanus*, Rome (noun)/Roman (adjective))? --

2066:

construction). In society SPQR was often "bully" language, the same as threatening to report or prosecute someone today

886:

to decide which is the more correct one, for I don´t know any latin and I am unable to decide which is the better one.

516:

Someone should add something about the utilization of this by hate groups, particularly white supremacists in Europe.

1813:

translating the SPQR as "of Rome" rather than leaving the equally clear but grammatically superior "Roman" in place.

1553: 792:

one could rearrange it to "Senatus Populi Quiritesque Romae" for "SPQR". It wouldn't be elegant Latin, but understood.

2458:

NOTE: If i remember correctly, a senator had his head removed for using that word in the senate during the republic.

2218: 561:

Jussayin, the sole long vowel in this Latin is in the included “Rome”, so I’m confused why more are marked that way.

2008: 1980: 1959: 2749:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2479:

The senate is of the people of rome. Romanus, Roman. To be Roman, Are Roman. We are Roman. Or, we are of Roman.

975:, usually tr. "the Senate and the Roman People". Please note I'm not removing Quirites, just asking for source. 93:

history on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3010: 2985: 2588: 2038: 527: 3259: 3251: 2943: 2347: 2326: 2187: 749:

since the Latin adjective "Romanus" means "of Rome", the usual translation is "the senate and people of Rome".

39: 21: 2501: 2391: 2371: 2310: 1704: 1548:

subdued a rebellious legion by apparently accepting all their demands and then famously addressing them with

589: 2563: 2522: 2321:

phrase to make it, I find it of less relevance. For now, I'll place a template there asking for sources. --

1824: 1797: 1746: 1341:

This version is remarkably similar to the version above and follows the same logic, being translated as the

684: 3002: 2977: 2935: 2405: 2130:

1. SPQR may be accurately translated into modern English as "The Roman Senate and (equally Roman) People".

1816: 1789: 1033: 767: 618: 519: 2857: 2413: 2291: 2170:

by Classicist Harry Mount, the translation is given as the more likely "The Senate and the Roman People".

1060: 883: 814: 626: 576: 1921: 1635: 607: 3274: 3156: 3049: 2847: 2832: 2788: 2768:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2756: 2636: 2603: 2540: 2497: 2387: 2306: 1771: 1075: 585: 376:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

198:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1985: 1486: 1471: 1152: 862: 695: 911:

I decided to include it and not to replace one by another. Let scolars debate who is the correct one.

3224: 3120: 2812: 2113: 2092: 2076: 1955: 1511:

of Rome would include women, children, and perhaps even slaves. All these classes were a part of the

1984:

is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under

1845:

I am probably making myself unpopular by not saying anything to do with Latin ;-), but here goes...

1601: 1037: 550: 3269:

No. Senatus and Populus are nouns linked by que. Senate and People. See many previous discussions.

2898: 2619: 2034: 1903: 1876: 1605: 1041: 839: 802:

Senatus Populique Quirites Romae" would be the proper form, not "Senatus Populi Quiritesque Romae"

704: 3093: 3063: 3034: 2960: 2918: 2559: 2518: 2202: 2147: 1717: 1661: 1093: 2753:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2769: 2715:

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/65DC8039-12C4-4AC4-8DAD-16F1608E99B7/0/cityarms.PDF

1560:). The shocked legionaries cried out, reaffirming their loyalty towards their beloved general. 882:

You have to present your translation of "The Senate and the Citizens of the People of Rome" to

3295: 3142: 2692: 1260: 1056: 736: 656: 1890: 3270: 3209: 3176: 3152: 3045: 2901:

has removed the claim that "This initialism is used as an official emblem of the modern-day

2843: 2828: 2784: 2632: 2599: 2536: 2265: 2241: 1935: 1767: 1728: 1665: 1575:. However, since word order is secondary to conjugation in Latin, one could rearrange it to 1463: 1412: 1071: 554: 542: 2871: 2776: 1950: 3220: 3116: 2879: 2808: 2700: 2664: 2109: 2088: 2072: 1621: 1591: 1495: 1173: 1020: 992: 976: 963: 952: 942: 932: 912: 887: 819: 462: 446: 428: 2001: 2455:

anceint and original name of the people of Rome. It was not in use at the time of SPQR.

2258: 962:

In all these books is there a mention of the initialism? What is the given translation?

73: 52: 2861: 2735:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 2614: 1898: 1871: 1855: 834: 360: 339: 182: 3027:

English: "The Roman Senate and People"; or more freely "The Senate and People of Rome"

2864: 2775:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

2742: 1972: 1503:

Skeptics ponder questionable references to this in history. One has to realize that a

3308: 3089: 3059: 3030: 2956: 2914: 2198: 2143: 2063: 1639: 1545: 1396: 1089: 3029:. Considering that both mean the same thing, why not use only the free translation? 1569:

The Senate and the Citizens of the People of Rome - Senatus Quiritesque Populi Romae

549:

Since nothing happened until today, when the flag was reinserted, I have decided to

3291: 3197: 3193: 3138: 2906: 1859: 1213: 1198: 652: 90: 735:

mentioned in a later paragraph of the article (which are "Romae" and "Romanus"). —

3205: 3172: 2842:

Done. Don't hesitate to improve the new subsection, using appropriate citations.

2261: 2237: 2166:

doesn't necessarily have to apply to both nouns. In the translation in the book

2138:

location (in a particular city) -- perhaps equivalent to "The Senate and People

1931: 1866:

class (with the teacher's supervision, of course!). What do other people think?

1727:

definition of "Roman" is "of Rome", so there is hardly a huge semantic gulf. --

1186:

Here is the translation section, which I just removed from the article's text:

2875: 2741:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 2660: 2055: 1283:

omanorum, translated into "of Rome", "Roman" or "of the Romans", respectively.

803: 638: 452: 172: 1540: 1408: 1538:

This can also be seen in the original denomination of the citizens right:

951:

That would be a long list, including both of Rostovtseff's books on Rome.

829: 271: 250: 166: 145: 2513: 1256: 1245: 1194: 2697:

after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add

1172:

I did some minor reformating and the like. Hope it meets with approval.

756:

speaking people—still several centuries away—would prefer it to sound.)

2339: 195: 1088:

Not to mention that there's no way to make sense of the Latin syntax.

2902: 1466:

translation is used in many movies and TV series about Ancient Rome.

1420: 1315: 2159:

As someone currently studying Classics I would say to those points:

3137:? A singular adjective would not, I believe, apply to both nouns. 2656: 194:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of 3151:

When they are linked by que I think they are treated as one noun.

2705:

to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

2598:

It's a translation of the phrase, not of the individual words. --

1863: 1524: 1404: 373: 2517:

to be done to show that Q never ever stood for anything else. --

2260:

shows that it was customary to skip the dots on coins. ... said:

1996:

Knowledge (XXG) article constitutes fair use. In addition to the

553:

and remove the flag altogether, for the reasons stated above. --

2910: 2682: 1851: 971:

I haven't gone back and checked; but the only version I know is

86: 85:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of 1416: 15: 2720:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

1971: 1400: 1232:

opulusque, "the people" and "and the people", respectively.

800:

to be attached to the first word in a phrase, meaning that

538: 287:. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our 3299: 3278: 3263: 3228: 3213: 3180: 3160: 3146: 3124: 3097: 3067: 3053: 3038: 3014: 2989: 2964: 2947: 2922: 2883: 2851: 2836: 2816: 2796: 2668: 2640: 2625: 2607: 2592: 2567: 2544: 2526: 2505: 2417: 2395: 2375: 2351: 2330: 2314: 2295: 2275: 2251: 2226: 2206: 2191: 2151: 2117: 2096: 2080: 2042: 1962: 1939: 1924: 1908: 1881: 1828: 1801: 1775: 1752: 1731: 1720: 1708: 1693:

Although the difference is slight it is indeed important.

1668: 1654: 1624: 1609: 1594: 1507:

of Rome was expected to fight for the Roman Republic. The

1498: 1489: 1474: 1176: 1155: 1097: 1079: 1064: 1049: 1023: 995: 979: 966: 955: 945: 935: 915: 890: 865: 847: 822: 806: 779: 739: 707: 698: 687: 660: 630: 610: 593: 570: 531: 2257:

I think I'm going to answer it myself: images such as on

1368:

This is another version and also follows the same logic.

3080:

I think the point is that the phrase uses the adjective

2681:

I have just added archive links to one external link on

3240:

Latin-derived languages such as Spanish and Italian .

2894: 2686: 1664:

should do the trick, so I've used this as replacement.

3200:"; or more freely' "The Senate and People of Rome". 1968:

Fair use rationale for Image:Coat of arms of Rome.png

1571:, which regrettably would change the initialism into 297:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome

2535:

Prove the negative, eh? That ought to be easy... --

1531:. Therefore, a citizen would originally be called a 487:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology

372:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2745:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 2338:romani", alluding to the Roman abbreviation SPQR.' 2027:. If you have any questions please ask them at the 2870:Given this, not exactly sure if a section here is 1563:Perhaps a more accurate modern translation of the 1446:This version translates into the currently famous 3350:Mid-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles 1587:. It would not be elegant Latin, but understood. 3355:All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages 2058:case. The plural could be used in other cases: 3345:Start-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles 3219:Ridiculous, but I guess you own the page now. 3171:Word by word translation is bad translation. 2731:This message was posted before February 2018. 1070:Find a reliable source and you can add it. -- 300:Template:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome 3375:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology articles 3370:Start-Class heraldry and vexillology articles 3290:comes after both elements, not between them. 931:in the first place? First I've ever seen it. 490:Template:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology 8: 2928:Current U.S. cultural issues sullies article 2017:Knowledge (XXG):Fair use rationale guideline 3286:is not an adjective, as far as I know, and 2435:C.J. Smith (2006) The Roman Clan, CUP, p200 1930:ever tried reading the discussion above? -- 19: 3000: 2975: 2933: 1814: 1314:, Quiritium being the genitive plural of 765: 423: 334: 245: 140: 47: 1915:The Senate and the Roman People, or what? 1660:It seems to have been a duplicate image. 1122:Now for your grammatical pronouncements. 651:in Naples (near where the story is set). 2062:, "the senate and people ratifying" (an 796:I'm no Latin expert, but I believe -que 2428: 1343:Senate and people of the Roman citizens 425: 336: 247: 142: 49: 2867: 563:2601:282:8101:28C0:7CF8:187E:76D9:315C 1552:- citizens (as opposed to soldiers - 1312:Senate and the citizens' Roman people 1287:All this leads to divergent phrases: 772:2601:985:101:311D:4820:712A:D1A6:9F18 760:located at (or in) the city of Rome. 280:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome 7: 2178:cannot mean 'of Rome' or 'at Rome'. 474:Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject 366:This article is within the scope of 277:This article is within the scope of 188:This article is within the scope of 79:This article is within the scope of 1527:, in effect a subgroup within the 1026:PS: Sign yourself with four " ~ ". 813:I don´t know any latin and I asked 208:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject History 38:It is of interest to the following 2451:SPQR Senatus Populusque Romanus. 1638:deleted? Does anyone here know? | 927:What is your source for including 303:Classical Greece and Rome articles 14: 2685:. Please take a moment to review 2489:Tempus Locusque, Time and Place. 1884:(Okay, so I lied about the Latin) 1448:The Senate and the people of Rome 1240:is disputed, it stood either for 493:heraldry and vexillology articles 386:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Latin 2060:senatu populoque consentientibus 2015:. Using one of the templates at 1581:Senatus Populi Quiritesque Romae 1577:Senatus Populique Quirites Romae 828: 667:"The senate and people of rome " 455: 445: 427: 359: 338: 270: 249: 175: 165: 144: 103:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Rome 72: 51: 20: 3335:Mid-importance history articles 2822:Use by white supremacist groups 2162:1. Yes, although the adjective 1675:The Senate and the Roman People 1615:New intro and historical sketch 1480:Historical context of this date 406:This article has been rated as 317:This article has been rated as 228:This article has been rated as 123:This article has been rated as 3214:21:07, 30 September 2023 (UTC) 3181:21:09, 30 September 2023 (UTC) 2506:02:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 2396:02:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 2276:15:59, 20 September 2009 (UTC) 2252:15:49, 20 September 2009 (UTC) 2029:Media copyright questions page 1981:Image:Coat of arms of Rome.png 1925:14:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC) 1263:had been soldiers (see below). 1255:uiritium, both of which mean " 637:I wonder whether the title of 532:14:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC) 1: 3365:Mid-importance Latin articles 3320:High-importance Rome articles 3300:04:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC) 3279:03:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC) 3264:16:07, 7 September 2024 (UTC) 3098:01:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC) 3068:22:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC) 3054:19:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC) 3039:18:19, 24 December 2020 (UTC) 2641:16:58, 11 February 2014 (UTC) 2626:03:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC) 2418:13:40, 25 November 2011 (UTC) 2118:05:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC) 2097:05:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC) 2043:19:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC) 1998:boilerplate fair use template 1963:21:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC) 1940:04:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC) 1829:19:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC) 1709:01:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC) 1610:12:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC) 1454:meaning "people", the suffix 1050:12:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC) 891:18:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC) 866:15:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC) 848:18:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC) 823:13:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC) 807:04:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC) 708:07:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC) 688:05:03, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 644:Strange People, Queer Notions 631:12:51, 25 November 2011 (UTC) 380:and see a list of open tasks. 202:and see a list of open tasks. 97:and see a list of open tasks. 3340:WikiProject History articles 3330:Start-Class history articles 3229:19:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC) 3015:09:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC) 2352:10:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 2331:20:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 2081:20:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 2025:criteria for speedy deletion 1669:13:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC) 1655:15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC) 1224:is disputed, some see in it 1015:SENATVS POPVLVS QVE ROMANVS 211:Template:WikiProject History 3125:11:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC) 2884:16:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC) 2852:10:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC) 2837:16:33, 30 August 2018 (UTC) 2797:00:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC) 2296:22:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 2227:23:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC) 2207:12:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC) 1625:15:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 1595:15:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 1499:14:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 1490:06:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 1475:06:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 1407:and his father the Emperor 1393:Senate and the Roman people 1177:03:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC) 1156:03:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 740:21:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 699:02:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 471:is within the scope of the 3391: 3360:Start-Class Latin articles 3325:All WikiProject Rome pages 2990:15:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC) 2965:11:52, 16 April 2019 (UTC) 2948:04:11, 16 April 2019 (UTC) 2923:14:03, 19 March 2019 (UTC) 2817:11:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC) 2762:(last update: 5 June 2024) 2703:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} 2678:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 2608:22:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC) 2593:22:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC) 2219:Reestablishment of manhood 2009:the image description page 1909:06:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 1776:13:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 1753:05:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 1732:09:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 1116:Senatus Populusque Romanus 1098:12:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC) 1080:07:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC) 1065:06:14, 21 April 2011 (UTC) 1024:11:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC) 996:13:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC) 980:17:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC) 973:Senatus Populusque Romanus 967:11:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC) 956:23:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC) 946:20:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC) 936:17:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC) 916:15:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC) 389:Template:WikiProject Latin 323:project's importance scale 234:project's importance scale 129:project's importance scale 3315:Start-Class Rome articles 3161:12:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC) 3147:02:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC) 2568:00:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 2545:10:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC) 2527:02:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC) 2376:22:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC) 2315:05:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC) 2192:22:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 2152:22:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC) 2011:and edit it to include a 1882:11:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1802:22:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 1721:10:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1590:Take another course, man. 1419:to pay homage to Emperor 1208:most assuredly stood for 611:10:31, 14 July 2005 (UTC) 594:02:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 571:01:00, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 545:18:35, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) 440: 405: 354: 316: 294:Classical Greece and Rome 265: 257:Classical Greece and Rome 227: 160: 122: 106:Template:WikiProject Rome 67: 46: 2669:15:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 1990:explanation or rationale 1544:. On a certain occasion 780:21:06, 2 June 2017 (UTC) 661:22:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC) 557:02:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC) 484:Heraldry and vexillology 435:Heraldry and vexillology 2674:External links modified 2383:concerning the people. 1131:Latin Prose Composition 647:was inspired by seeing 579:01:03 30 09 2005 (UTC) 2858:Anti-Defamation League 2197:avoids any ambiguity. 1976: 884:User:Homagetocatalonia 815:User:Homagetocatalonia 725:Expansion of R in SPQR 28:This article is rated 3235:Incorrect translation 2651:How late was it used? 2123:Clarifying conclusion 1992:as to why its use in 1975: 1699:comment was added by 1620:accuracy template on. 1411:. It is also used in 32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 2743:regular verification 2728:to let others know. 2689:. If necessary, add 2476:and for the people. 2378:Jon Jeffery, Leiden 1858:called SPQR, set in 1636:Image:SPQR-Stone.jpg 1541:Ius civile Quiritium 3084:, not the genitive 2733:After February 2018 2724:parameter below to 2494:considered a pleb. 1662:Image:Spqrstone.jpg 1458:meaning "and", and 1415:which was built in 1271:probably stood for 1197:origin even during 1182:Translation section 191:WikiProject History 2889:Modern use by Rome 2738:InternetArchiveBot 2578:Of Rome, or Roman? 2358:Historical context 2013:fair use rationale 1977: 1259:". Originally all 479:list of open tasks 34:content assessment 3017: 3005:comment added by 2992: 2980:comment added by 2950: 2938:comment added by 2795: 2763: 2408:comment added by 2079: 2064:ablative absolute 2048:ablative absolute 1831: 1819:comment added by 1792:comment added by 1712: 1523:, a member of an 1052: 1036:comment added by 782: 770:comment added by 685:Total randonimity 621:comment added by 577:Homagetocatalonia 522:comment added by 509: 508: 505: 504: 501: 500: 422: 421: 418: 417: 369:WikiProject Latin 333: 332: 329: 328: 244: 243: 240: 239: 139: 138: 135: 134: 3382: 3191: 2791: 2790:Talk to my owner 2786: 2761: 2760: 2739: 2704: 2696: 2624: 2622: 2617: 2436: 2433: 2420: 2271: 2247: 2075: 1988:but there is no 1946:Use by Mussolini 1906: 1901: 1879: 1874: 1850:There is also a 1804: 1694: 1652: 1647: 1644: 1565:original meaning 1031: 844: 837: 832: 786:Alternate phrase 679: 678: 674: 633: 539:www.novaroma.org 534: 495: 494: 491: 488: 485: 465: 460: 459: 458: 449: 442: 441: 431: 424: 412:importance scale 394: 393: 390: 387: 384: 363: 356: 355: 350: 342: 335: 305: 304: 301: 298: 295: 274: 267: 266: 261: 253: 246: 216: 215: 214:history articles 212: 209: 206: 185: 180: 179: 178: 169: 162: 161: 156: 148: 141: 111: 110: 107: 104: 101: 82:WikiProject Rome 76: 69: 68: 63: 55: 48: 31: 25: 24: 16: 3390: 3389: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3305: 3304: 3237: 3189: 3023: 3007:109.170.218.154 2930: 2891: 2824: 2804: 2794: 2789: 2754: 2747:have permission 2737: 2698: 2690: 2676: 2653: 2620: 2615: 2613: 2585:129.199.158.132 2580: 2449: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2434: 2430: 2403: 2360: 2303: 2284: 2267: 2243: 2234: 2214: 2168:Amo, Amas, Amat 2125: 2105: 2073:Septentrionalis 2050: 1970: 1956:Dante Alighieri 1948: 1917: 1904: 1899: 1877: 1872: 1842: 1787: 1695:—The preceding 1677: 1648: 1645: 1640: 1632: 1617: 1558:Divus Julius 70 1482: 1413:Trajan's Column 1244:ue - "and", or 1184: 1170: 1108: 1009: 977:Septentrionalis 953:Septentrionalis 933:Septentrionalis 840: 835: 788: 727: 718: 680: 676: 672: 670: 669: 616: 602: 517: 514: 492: 489: 486: 483: 482: 463:Heraldry portal 461: 456: 454: 391: 388: 385: 382: 381: 348: 302: 299: 296: 293: 292: 259: 213: 210: 207: 204: 203: 181: 176: 174: 154: 125:High-importance 108: 105: 102: 99: 98: 62:High‑importance 61: 29: 12: 11: 5: 3388: 3386: 3378: 3377: 3372: 3367: 3362: 3357: 3352: 3347: 3342: 3337: 3332: 3327: 3322: 3317: 3307: 3306: 3303: 3302: 3281: 3256:49.184.200.115 3248:49.184.200.115 3236: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3131:S.Pque Romanus 3127: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3100: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3022: 3019: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2982:210.55.134.106 2968: 2967: 2940:203.174.177.42 2929: 2926: 2899:LoganSouthward 2890: 2887: 2862:Mark Pitcavage 2855: 2854: 2823: 2820: 2803: 2800: 2787: 2781: 2780: 2773: 2718: 2717: 2709:Added archive 2675: 2672: 2652: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2579: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2530: 2529: 2492: 2470: 2465: 2461: 2448: 2447:SPQR, Meaning. 2445: 2443: 2438: 2437: 2427: 2426: 2422: 2400: 2386: 2381: 2359: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2344:83.188.230.241 2340:Asterix#Humour 2334: 2333: 2323:83.188.199.174 2302: 2299: 2283: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2233: 2230: 2213: 2210: 2184:87.194.212.174 2156: 2124: 2121: 2104: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2069: 2068: 2049: 2046: 2035:BetacommandBot 1969: 1966: 1947: 1944: 1943: 1942: 1922:130.226.173.22 1916: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1856:adventure game 1841: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1735: 1734: 1676: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1631: 1630:Image deletion 1628: 1616: 1613: 1600:of his time. 1535:- "spearman". 1481: 1478: 1444: 1443: 1389: 1388: 1366: 1365: 1339: 1338: 1308: 1307: 1285: 1284: 1265: 1264: 1261:Roman citizens 1234: 1233: 1218: 1217: 1183: 1180: 1169: 1168:Format Changes 1166: 1141: 1140: 1139: 1138: 1134: 1127: 1107: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1083: 1082: 1008: 1005: 1003: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 985: 984: 983: 982: 959: 958: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 920: 919: 918: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 896: 895: 873: 872: 871: 870: 869: 868: 853: 852: 851: 850: 787: 784: 753: 752: 751: 750: 743: 742: 726: 723: 717: 714: 713: 712: 711: 710: 668: 665: 664: 663: 608:Matthew Platts 601: 598: 597: 596: 559: 558: 524:173.13.237.237 513: 510: 507: 506: 503: 502: 499: 498: 496: 467: 466: 450: 438: 437: 432: 420: 419: 416: 415: 408:Mid-importance 404: 398: 397: 395: 392:Latin articles 378:the discussion 364: 352: 351: 349:Mid‑importance 343: 331: 330: 327: 326: 319:Mid-importance 315: 309: 308: 306: 275: 263: 262: 260:Mid‑importance 254: 242: 241: 238: 237: 230:Mid-importance 226: 220: 219: 217: 200:the discussion 187: 186: 183:History portal 170: 158: 157: 155:Mid‑importance 149: 137: 136: 133: 132: 121: 115: 114: 112: 95:the discussion 77: 65: 64: 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3387: 3376: 3373: 3371: 3368: 3366: 3363: 3361: 3358: 3356: 3353: 3351: 3348: 3346: 3343: 3341: 3338: 3336: 3333: 3331: 3328: 3326: 3323: 3321: 3318: 3316: 3313: 3312: 3310: 3301: 3297: 3293: 3289: 3285: 3282: 3280: 3276: 3272: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3261: 3257: 3253: 3249: 3244: 3241: 3234: 3230: 3226: 3222: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3215: 3211: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3195: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3162: 3158: 3154: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3135:S.Pque Romani 3132: 3128: 3126: 3122: 3118: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3099: 3095: 3091: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3075: 3074: 3069: 3065: 3061: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3051: 3047: 3043: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3036: 3032: 3028: 3020: 3018: 3016: 3012: 3008: 3004: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2949: 2945: 2941: 2937: 2927: 2925: 2924: 2920: 2916: 2912: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2896: 2888: 2886: 2885: 2881: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2863: 2859: 2853: 2849: 2845: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2821: 2819: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2801: 2799: 2798: 2792: 2785: 2778: 2774: 2771: 2767: 2766: 2765: 2758: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2734: 2729: 2727: 2723: 2716: 2712: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2702: 2694: 2688: 2684: 2679: 2673: 2671: 2670: 2666: 2662: 2657: 2650: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2623: 2618: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2605: 2601: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2590: 2586: 2577: 2569: 2565: 2561: 2560:Sephiroth9611 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2546: 2542: 2538: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2528: 2524: 2520: 2519:Sephiroth9611 2515: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2498:Originalfenir 2495: 2490: 2487: 2484: 2480: 2477: 2473: 2468: 2463: 2459: 2456: 2452: 2446: 2444: 2432: 2429: 2425: 2421: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2398: 2397: 2393: 2389: 2388:Originalfenir 2384: 2379: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2368:85.151.137.82 2364: 2357: 2353: 2349: 2345: 2341: 2336: 2335: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2312: 2308: 2307:Pastafarian23 2300: 2298: 2297: 2293: 2289: 2281: 2277: 2273: 2272: 2270: 2263: 2259: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2249: 2248: 2246: 2239: 2231: 2229: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2211: 2209: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2194: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2179: 2177: 2171: 2169: 2165: 2160: 2157: 2154: 2153: 2149: 2145: 2141: 2137: 2131: 2128: 2122: 2120: 2119: 2115: 2111: 2102: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2067: 2065: 2059: 2057: 2052: 2051: 2047: 2045: 2044: 2040: 2036: 2032: 2031:. Thank you. 2030: 2026: 2020: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2007:Please go to 2005: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1982: 1974: 1967: 1965: 1964: 1961: 1957: 1952: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1923: 1914: 1910: 1907: 1902: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1883: 1880: 1875: 1868: 1867: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1847: 1846: 1840:Computer game 1839: 1830: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1794:69.115.129.95 1791: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1754: 1751: 1748: 1744: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1733: 1730: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1719: 1713: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1701:69.248.112.19 1698: 1691: 1687: 1684: 1680: 1674: 1670: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1653: 1651: 1643: 1637: 1629: 1627: 1626: 1623: 1614: 1612: 1611: 1607: 1603: 1597: 1596: 1593: 1588: 1586: 1582: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1561: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1546:Julius Caesar 1543: 1542: 1536: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1501: 1500: 1497: 1492: 1491: 1488: 1479: 1477: 1476: 1473: 1467: 1465: 1461: 1457: 1453: 1449: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1410: 1406: 1402: 1399:built around 1398: 1397:Arch of Titus 1394: 1386: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1363: 1359: 1355: 1351: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1344: 1336: 1332: 1328: 1324: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1317: 1313: 1305: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1270: 1267: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1248: 1243: 1239: 1236: 1235: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1220: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1200: 1199:ancient Roman 1196: 1190: 1187: 1181: 1179: 1178: 1175: 1167: 1165: 1162: 1158: 1157: 1154: 1148: 1144: 1135: 1132: 1128: 1124: 1123: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1117: 1112: 1105: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1062: 1058: 1053: 1051: 1047: 1043: 1039: 1035: 1027: 1025: 1022: 1016: 1013: 1007:SPQR Dispute? 1006: 1004: 997: 994: 989: 988: 987: 986: 981: 978: 974: 970: 969: 968: 965: 961: 960: 957: 954: 950: 949: 948: 947: 944: 938: 937: 934: 930: 917: 914: 910: 909: 908: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 892: 889: 885: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 867: 864: 859: 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 849: 846: 845: 843: 838: 831: 826: 825: 824: 821: 816: 812: 811: 810: 809: 808: 805: 799: 794: 793: 785: 783: 781: 777: 773: 769: 761: 757: 747: 746: 745: 744: 741: 738: 733: 732: 731: 724: 722: 716:Small Profits 715: 709: 706: 702: 701: 700: 697: 692: 691: 690: 689: 686: 675: 666: 662: 658: 654: 650: 646: 645: 640: 636: 635: 634: 632: 628: 624: 620: 613: 612: 609: 605: 599: 595: 591: 587: 586:Miss Innocent 582: 581: 580: 578: 573: 572: 568: 564: 556: 552: 548: 547: 546: 544: 540: 535: 533: 529: 525: 521: 511: 497: 480: 476: 475: 470: 464: 453: 451: 448: 444: 443: 439: 436: 433: 430: 426: 413: 409: 403: 400: 399: 396: 379: 375: 371: 370: 365: 362: 358: 357: 353: 347: 344: 341: 337: 324: 320: 314: 311: 310: 307: 290: 286: 282: 281: 276: 273: 269: 268: 264: 258: 255: 252: 248: 235: 231: 225: 222: 221: 218: 201: 197: 193: 192: 184: 173: 171: 168: 164: 163: 159: 153: 150: 147: 143: 130: 126: 120: 117: 116: 113: 109:Rome articles 96: 92: 91:ancient Roman 88: 84: 83: 78: 75: 71: 70: 66: 60: 57: 54: 50: 45: 41: 35: 27: 23: 18: 17: 3287: 3283: 3245: 3242: 3238: 3201: 3194:Roman Senate 3187: 3134: 3130: 3085: 3081: 3026: 3024: 3001:— Preceding 2997: 2976:— Preceding 2934:— Preceding 2931: 2907:municipality 2892: 2856: 2825: 2805: 2802:Sanity check 2782: 2757:source check 2736: 2730: 2725: 2721: 2719: 2680: 2677: 2654: 2581: 2496: 2491: 2488: 2485: 2481: 2478: 2474: 2469: 2464: 2460: 2457: 2453: 2450: 2442: 2431: 2423: 2410:83.80.19.212 2404:— Preceding 2399: 2385: 2380: 2365: 2361: 2304: 2301:Pazzi Romani 2285: 2268: 2266: 2244: 2242: 2235: 2215: 2195: 2180: 2175: 2172: 2167: 2163: 2161: 2158: 2155: 2139: 2135: 2132: 2129: 2126: 2106: 2070: 2061: 2053: 2033: 2021: 2006: 1993: 1979: 1978: 1949: 1918: 1893:and created 1870: 1869: 1860:Ancient Rome 1849: 1848: 1844: 1843: 1821:72.87.239.12 1815:— Preceding 1784: 1742: 1714: 1692: 1688: 1685: 1681: 1678: 1649: 1641: 1633: 1618: 1598: 1589: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1562: 1549: 1539: 1537: 1532: 1528: 1520: 1516: 1513:Roman people 1512: 1508: 1504: 1502: 1493: 1487:66.30.94.153 1483: 1472:66.30.94.153 1468: 1459: 1455: 1451: 1447: 1445: 1439: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1392: 1390: 1384: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1367: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1342: 1340: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1322: 1311: 1309: 1303: 1299: 1295: 1291: 1286: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1252: 1246: 1241: 1237: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1209: 1205: 1191: 1189:Translation 1188: 1185: 1171: 1163: 1159: 1153:66.30.94.153 1149: 1145: 1142: 1130: 1115: 1113: 1109: 1106:Yes, dispute 1057:LaVieEntiere 1054: 1028: 1017: 1014: 1010: 1002: 972: 939: 928: 926: 894:correctness. 863:81.69.249.89 841: 833: 801: 797: 795: 790: 789: 766:— Preceding 762: 758: 754: 737:Isaac Dupree 728: 719: 696:66.30.94.153 681: 671:"": --> 648: 642: 623:83.80.19.212 617:— Preceding 614: 606: 603: 574: 560: 536: 515: 472: 468: 407: 367: 318: 285:project page 278: 229: 189: 124: 80: 40:WikiProjects 3271:Ian Dalziel 3153:Ian Dalziel 3046:Ian Dalziel 3021:Translation 2844:Robincantin 2829:Robincantin 2633:Ian Dalziel 2600:Ian Dalziel 2537:Ian Dalziel 2282:Modern List 1788:—Preceding 1768:Ian Dalziel 1729:Ian Dalziel 1666:Valentinian 1072:Ian Dalziel 1032:—Preceding 518:—Preceding 30:Start-class 3309:Categories 3221:WP Ludicer 3188:I removed 3117:WP Ludicer 2809:Botteville 2424:References 2288:86.129.6.0 2077:PMAnderson 2056:nominative 1567:would be: 1329:opulusque 1279:omanus or 1228:opulus or 1212:enatus - " 1174:Wilybadger 1021:Flamarande 993:Flamarande 964:Flamarande 943:Flamarande 913:Flamarande 888:Flamarande 820:Flamarande 639:Jack Vance 2895:this edit 2783:Cheers. — 2777:this tool 2770:this tool 2616:Gen. Quon 2232:S.P.Q.R.? 1951:This page 1891:been bold 1750:Valentine 1743:Literally 1602:DavoudMSA 1554:Suetonius 1409:Vespasian 1403:to honor 1333:uiritium 1302:uiritium 1038:DavoudMSA 641:'s novel 289:talk page 3292:—Tamfang 3139:—Tamfang 3090:GrindtXX 3060:Kiwi Rex 3031:Kiwi Rex 3025:It says 3003:unsigned 2978:unsigned 2957:GrindtXX 2936:unsigned 2915:GrindtXX 2693:cbignore 2514:Quirites 2406:unsigned 2199:Teppic74 2144:Jmacwiki 2002:fair use 1986:fair use 1895:the page 1817:unsigned 1790:unsigned 1697:unsigned 1634:Why was 1550:quirites 1517:citizens 1515:but not 1360:uirites 1337:omanorum 1257:spearmen 1090:Cynwolfe 1046:contribs 1034:unsigned 929:Quirites 836:Soothing 768:unsigned 705:MJeanson 653:—Tamfang 619:unsigned 520:unsigned 512:Untitled 3284:Populus 3202:Neither 3082:Romanus 2793::Online 2722:checked 2687:my edit 2176:Romanus 2174:agree. 2164:Romanus 2142:Rome". 2140:who are 1932:Lo'oris 1889:I have 1747:Vincent 1521:citizen 1505:citizen 1464:English 1452:Populus 1430:enatus 1375:enatus 1356:opulus 1352:enatus 1325:enatus 1298:opulus 1294:enatus 1249:uirites 1201:times. 1195:archaic 551:be bold 410:on the 321:on the 232:on the 205:History 196:History 152:History 127:on the 3206:Zaslav 3198:People 3173:Zaslav 3129:Is it 2903:comune 2872:WP:DUE 2701:nobots 2621:(Talk) 2262:Rursus 2238:Rursus 1900:Carrot 1873:Carrot 1854:-like 1718:Huey45 1646:ndonic 1533:Quiris 1529:people 1509:people 1434:opulus 1421:Trajan 1417:113 AD 1387:omanus 1379:opulus 1364:omanus 1316:Quiris 1306:omanus 1275:omae, 1214:Senate 941:have? 36:scale. 3192:"The 3086:Romae 2909:) of 2876:Pudeo 2827:done. 2661:Amble 2269:bork³ 2245:bork³ 2103:Licet 1864:Latin 1525:elite 1460:Romae 1442:omae. 1405:Titus 1401:81 AD 804:Nik42 555:Arwel 543:Arwel 383:Latin 374:Latin 346:Latin 3296:talk 3288:–que 3275:talk 3260:talk 3252:talk 3225:talk 3210:talk 3196:and 3177:talk 3157:talk 3143:talk 3121:talk 3094:talk 3064:talk 3050:talk 3035:talk 3011:talk 2986:talk 2961:talk 2944:talk 2919:talk 2911:Rome 2880:talk 2874:. -- 2848:talk 2833:talk 2813:talk 2726:true 2683:SPQR 2665:talk 2637:talk 2604:talk 2589:talk 2564:talk 2541:talk 2523:talk 2502:talk 2414:talk 2392:talk 2372:talk 2348:talk 2342:. -- 2327:talk 2311:talk 2292:talk 2223:talk 2212:SPQR 2203:talk 2188:talk 2148:talk 2114:talk 2110:Dave 2093:talk 2089:Dave 2039:talk 1994:this 1960:Talk 1936:talk 1852:Myst 1825:talk 1798:talk 1772:talk 1705:talk 1622:Dave 1606:talk 1592:Dave 1585:SPQR 1583:for 1573:SQPR 1496:Dave 1391:The 1310:The 1094:talk 1076:talk 1061:talk 1042:talk 776:talk 673:edit 657:talk 649:SPQN 627:talk 600:SPQL 590:talk 567:talk 528:talk 469:SPQR 119:High 100:Rome 89:and 87:Rome 59:Rome 3133:or 2893:In 2860:'s 2751:RfC 2713:to 2136:not 1905:Man 1878:Man 1579:or 1456:que 1438:ue 1383:ue 1251:or 798:has 402:Mid 313:Mid 224:Mid 3311:: 3298:) 3277:) 3262:) 3254:) 3227:) 3212:) 3179:) 3159:) 3145:) 3123:) 3096:) 3066:) 3052:) 3037:) 3013:) 2988:) 2963:) 2946:) 2921:) 2897:, 2882:) 2866:: 2850:) 2835:) 2815:) 2764:. 2759:}} 2755:{{ 2699:{{ 2695:}} 2691:{{ 2667:) 2659:-- 2639:) 2606:) 2591:) 2566:) 2558:-- 2543:) 2525:) 2504:) 2416:) 2394:) 2374:) 2350:) 2329:) 2313:) 2294:) 2274:) 2250:) 2225:) 2205:) 2190:) 2150:) 2116:) 2095:) 2041:) 2004:. 1958:| 1954:-- 1938:) 1897:. 1827:) 1800:) 1774:) 1707:) 1608:) 1556:: 1450:. 1423:. 1345:. 1216:". 1096:) 1078:) 1063:) 1048:) 1044:• 778:) 659:) 629:) 592:) 569:) 530:) 3294:( 3273:( 3258:( 3250:( 3223:( 3208:( 3190:' 3175:( 3155:( 3141:( 3119:( 3092:( 3062:( 3048:( 3033:( 3009:( 2984:( 2959:( 2942:( 2917:( 2905:( 2878:( 2846:( 2831:( 2811:( 2779:. 2772:. 2663:( 2635:( 2602:( 2587:( 2562:( 2539:( 2521:( 2500:( 2412:( 2390:( 2370:( 2346:( 2325:( 2309:( 2290:( 2264:( 2240:( 2221:( 2201:( 2186:( 2146:( 2112:( 2091:( 2037:( 1934:( 1823:( 1796:( 1770:( 1711:. 1703:( 1650:O 1642:A 1604:( 1440:R 1436:q 1432:P 1428:S 1385:R 1381:q 1377:P 1373:S 1362:R 1358:Q 1354:P 1350:S 1335:R 1331:Q 1327:P 1323:S 1304:R 1300:Q 1296:P 1292:S 1281:R 1277:R 1273:R 1269:R 1253:Q 1247:Q 1242:q 1238:Q 1230:P 1226:P 1222:P 1210:S 1206:S 1092:( 1074:( 1059:( 1040:( 842:R 774:( 677:] 655:( 625:( 588:( 565:( 526:( 481:. 414:. 325:. 291:. 236:. 131:. 42::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index