Talk:Roman calendar

From NovaRoma
Revision as of 03:38, 9 February 2008 by Marca Hortensia Maior (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

I only see one problem with this page, that being that on dies comitiales, nefasti, and nefasti publici, it is listed that magistrates may not exercise certain specific judicial functions. In the case of comitiales, a magistrate certainly could exercise any and all his judicial functions. On dies nefasti and nefasti publici, a magistrate certainly could not exercise any of his judicial functions. I post it here on the discussion page first, but if there is no discontent, I'll certainly make the necessary changes. -- Q. Caecilius Metellus

Title Change?

I think that perhaps this page should be changed to something like "calendrical designations" or something to that effect, since that is really what this page covers. Something on the Roman calendar on the whole would be quite an exhaustive article, which isn't what, I think, this article is meant to provide. Q. Caecilius Metellus 23:58, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

Well, the subtitle says "Special days in the calendar", how about that? Whatever we choose, let's make sure that it is something that fits into normal text so it is easy to make links. M. Lucretius Agricola 00:43, 27 April 2006 (CDT)

Update due?

I seem to recall the pontifices making a ruling about the significance of the various dies, including FP, some time ago. Am I right? If so, should this page be updated to reflect that ruling? - Cordus 02:28, 23 December 2006 (CET)

No, what our pontifices say should be reflected on Calendar (Nova Roma). Agricola 03:28, 9 February 2008 (CET)

Dies Nefasti

I was leafing through van Haeperen's 'Le collège pontifical' & she makes the point quoting Macrobius that the Dies Nefasti restrictions were primarily so magistrates could carry out their religious duties without being impeded by other work/business.Marca Hortensia Maior

Be bold and update. Cite your sources as usual. Agricola 03:28, 9 February 2008 (CET)

thanks, I've been thinking about it and I'm not so sure, Haeperen's book isn't that good....but the note is here if I find another good source that agrees. So handy these discussion pages.

Personal tools