Talk:Roman aristocracy

message: Why don't the equites deserve their own separate article, rather than a combined article with with patricians etc?  They were a very important part of Roman society, particularly during the late republic.  Has this move been debated elsewhere? --Urg writer (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, guys. I changed the article name to "Roman aristocracy" because the text (written by me originally) covered Senators as much as Knights. In practice, it's impossible to distinguish between the two orders as one (Senators) were a subset of the other (Knights). I regard contributor Urg's intervention as unhelpful - a typical "improvement" by someone who has contributed nothing to the article and, most likely knows little or nothing about the subject.EraNavigator (talk) 13:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I proposed the change here six months ago, and the only comment posted here was in favour of the change.  When the equites article was changed to the 'Roman Aristocracy', as far as I know it was never proposed here but was just done without consultation.  Equites are an important feature of the social structure of the Roman republic and empire, and deserve their own article, just like the patricians and the senate get their own article.  As stated above, my real problem with the 'Roman aristocracy' article is that it confuses a number of separate concepts.  The patricians were a class (in the true sense of the word).  The senators were elected government officials.  And the equites were a quasi military / financial group.  I don't understand what concept is sought to be demonstrated by the combination of the three.  If the point is to establish what counted someone as 'noble' within Rome, then it can be found here: nobiles.  But given Roman government comprised (at various times) rule by individuals (eg. kings and later emperors), small groups (eg. senators) and large groups (eg. the popular assemblies) it is a bit confusing to refer to a constant Roman 'aristocracy' as comprising these three separate types of groups.  At certain times, particularly the late republic, the concept of an aristocracy in Rome is more persuasive (see Syme's Roman Revolution and Augustan Aristocracy) and maybe that is what this article should focus on rather than combining the three concepts.  Also, the references to equites as 'knights' is a really confusing anachronism.--Urg writer (talk) 21:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Pro di immortales!!!!! The senators are most emphatically NOT a a subset of the equites. That's such a fundamental misunderstanding of the ordines I don't even know where to start. See Roman Empire#Census rank for designations specific to the Empire, with the understanding that the nature of the equites changed radically during the civil wars at the end of the Republic. But for instance in the Empire, see the difference between the cursus honorum and the tres militiae. This article shouldn't even exist under this meaningless title. The one thing that is certain about the nebulous rank of equites is that they were something different from senators. See the work of Arnaldo Momigliano and T.P. Wiseman on this subject. Also in French, Claude Nicolet. Urg writer is right to point to the problems with this article, which only compound the usual problems in talking about the Roman nobiles. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equites article gone 

message: This was redirected three years ago to Social class in ancient Rome. I know this happened a while ago, but I just want to check before I procedurally remove the good article status from this page that this is indeed the consensus. From an outside perspective it appears to have reduced the quality of the encyclopaedia overall. I left a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome and will ping the editors involved above.  AIRcorn (talk) 21:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I am procedurally delisting this as a redirect cannot be a good article. Discussion is ongoing on what to do about these articles, but unless this is restored it should remain delisted. Any other articles can be nominated at WP:GAN. If this is restored without major changes then the good article status can also be restored, just make a note here or in a new section so it is easy to follow what has happened. Ping me r leave a message at WT:GAN if help is needed. AIRcorn (talk) 22:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect