#republic of florence

[grapecola]

It’s my new Munich double briefcase in green from Republic of Florence.

[iloveplacebo]

female rage ft. Fang Runin

The personification of female rage

[emaadsidiki]

Florentine Sunset 🌇

[brother-emperors]

HAIL TO THE KING, BABY

it's like. the horror of war and bodies and the gore of power that demands people be brought violently under the heel. something else about renaissance discourses on tyranny, too. everything repeats itself. everything repeats itself. everything---

Vercingetorix throws down his arms at the feet of Julius Caesar, Lionel Noel Royer, The siege of Florence, Stefano Ussi

Caesar and Genocide: Confronting the Dark Side of Caesar's Gallic Wars, K. Raaflaub, The Medici, Mary Hollingsworth

[grand-army-radio]

This song is for Rex.

[imy2]

Cupid's got a needle. It'll find a vein. Careful, 'cause you'll bleed a little. But pretty soon romance will marinate your brain. (Lovesick - Women on the Urge of a Nervous Breakdown) 

Smoke - Pvris, Life-size dissected woman (detail) - Jacques Fabien Gautier Dagoty, Strangeness & Charm - Florence + the Machine, In My Veins - Andrew Belle, To have and to hold - Giulia Quaresima, Picking Up Pieces - Blue October, Let’s Hurt Tonight - OneRepublic 

[em-cosplay42]

Traveling somewhere with heavy bags and helping with parts of artist stand after sleepless night (fuck the girlies having party whole night next door at hotel)....

I am drenched, tired and hungry qwq

Con was at last fun.

[thiswaycomessomethingwicked]

Ficino: so. I've had an idea.

Church: put it back! PUT IT RIGHT BACK WHERE YOU FOUND IT!

Ficino: but. it's about love!!

Church:

Church: alright. speak.

Ficino: so there are daemons, right? Everyone has one. And there are also bad daemons and good daemons and the best are the ones that belong to Venus, goddess of love--

Church: excuse me what

Church:

Church: you know you're a priest right?

Ficino: I've some finicky theology worked out to make all of this okie dokie. Trust me. Don't worry about it.

Church: what

Ficino: what?

[t4ckie-j4ckie]

does anyone else ever get that feeling where its like.

you're fine and you're okay and you're fine and you're okay and everything's neutral and normal and neutral and below-average and okay, when you're suddenly assaulted by the bare and basic and horrifically made ingenuity of humanity. The never-ending cycle and motor of change, but it doesn't change, does it? The monolith and its ideals stand tall and ever-lasting for thousands of thousands of years and you lay there in its shadow and watch as history swirls and coils around it, century-long projects rising from marshy and swampy earth to curl in circles and domes and spires, a dizzying red white and green that lasts far, far, far, far, beyond what anyone can ever pray- because that's what they do, pray- to remember or know, the dazzling endlessness of the human want for pretty things, and all the architects and well-known magicians of the past cry and holler and yell in victory and wonder as they fireworks crack above the watery town full of alleys- we did it, we made it, we did it, it still stands after hundreds of years-

and you just sit there and look up and watch and marvel and when they ask you isn't it wonderful? Isn't our world, our work, our life, our belief in something we never see wonderful? Isn't the human life a marvellous thing? and you have to sit there and watch as pyramids are built before you yet still stand thousands of years later, and you just have to go yes, yes it is, but why do you still celebrate? there is nothing more to build, nothing more to do, all the wonder in the world has already been made.

and the ancestors of the world's people and buildings and history look down and say oh.

oh, oh. oh. oh, OH.

The world is still full of wonder-

but how do i make it? how to i push it forth when every speck of immortality has already been taken into the wonderful domes and spires and palaces of the old? How can i create wonder, when there is no more space to build?

and. and they just reply-

you have to be willing to dig.

[elbiotipo]

I'm always criticizing eurocentric fantasy worldbuilding, but one thing I think it's underused are city-states and trade republics and leagues. Not that they don't exist, but they're often in the background, the fantasy genre is so focused on monarchies and dynasties and noble drama, while those systems have so much room for intrigue and stuff without getting into "who's the TRUE heir of the super magical monarch" (yes, I know they had aristocratic families that ruled almost as monarchs, but trust me, Medici drama is another beast from regular feudal stuff)

Venice with its stupidly complex election system and their eternal rivals in Genoa, Florence home of the Rennaissance, the Hanseatic League, and lesser known examples like Novgorod, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Taifa of Córdoba, the Consolat de Mar (technically not a republic but kind of an Iberian Hansa) and if we go farther back, the leagues of city states of antiquity... you know what, I'm bored of feudalism. Next time I do a fantasy setting, it will all be city states and republics. Fuck feudalism.

[i-was-today-years-old-when]

i learned what is the most bizarre government in world history?

A bit strange that no one speaks of Italian city-states here.

I think they tried just every conceivable form of government. I will tell a bit about my dearest Florentine Republic.

In 13th century, Italian city-states witnessed an intense fight between pro-Emperor and pro-Pope factions. Most nobles were pro-Emperor. Florence was one of the places where they lost the battle, which led to the establishment of democracy.

Of course, this democracy was very different from what we call democracy today. Modern Western countries are representative democracies where people only vote in the elections and countries are governed by professional politicians. A medieval Italian would call such system aristocratic.

Of course, Florentine democracy was also exclusive. Wage labourers, people in debt and women were excluded. But all others could directly participate in government of their country: 5,000–8,000 people out of 25,000–50,000 adult citizens.

Political parties were forbidden (actually, the word party was invented as a slur, something that people do not remember now). Elections were seen as aristocratic mechanism because the rich and the educated would be capable to convince or bribe others to vote for them. So the main mechanism of democracy was casting lots.

Florence was subdivided into four quarters, sixteen neighborhoods and twenty-one corporations (seven major ones representing rich citizens and fourteen minor ones representing poor citizens): every citizen was a member of one of those. Initially, corporations had something to do with profession. Nobles renounced their nobility and joined corporations to be able to participate in the government. For instance, nobleman Dante Alighieri entered the corporation of Doctors and Apothecaries, and the ancestors of Niccolo Machiavelli registered in the corporation of Winemakers.

The main government body was Signoria. It consisted of eight Priors (two representing every quarter, six representing major corporations and two representing minor corporations) and one Gonfalonier of Justice, the chairman. They ruled the city during the period of two months only and then replaced by others. Signoria was the main legislative and executive authority. However, it could take major decisions only in common with other bodies such as Twelve Good Men (three persons from every quarter, mostly rich people) and Sixteen Gonfaloniers (one from every neighbourhood). These three bodies (Signoria, Twelve Good Men and Sixteen Gonfaloniers) were all chosen by lot: notes with their names were chosen from special leather bags preserved in the sacristy of the Santa Croce cathedral.

The laws were approved by the Council of the Commune (192 people, 48 from every quarter, majority rich) and the Council of the People (160 people, 10 from every neighbourhood, majority poor).

There was an enormous quantity of other governing bodies that regulated everything that needed to be regulated in the Republic, from quality checks of the bread to the licensing of the sex workers. In most cases, people served from three to six months. It meant that every full-fledged male citizen of the Florentine Republic could hope to be chosen for one of these positions.

The judicial and military power belonged to the podestà, a foreign citizen with good reputation, legal education and a military company or at least a group of armed servants. Florentines believed that a foreigner would be a more impartial judge in Florentine discussions. A podestà was invited to Florence for six months.

Finally, the Medici family managed to circumvent the system and become rulers of Florence but it took time. The system of checks and balances did work.

However, no one was able to circumvent the government system of Venetian Republic. Do you know why?

For more than five centuries (from 1268 to 1797) the procedure to elect the doge (chief of state) did not change.

Choose 30 members of the Great Council by lot.

These 30 people are reduced by lot to 9.

These 9 people choose 40 other people.

These 40 are reduced by lot to 12.

These 12 people choose 25 other people.

These 25 people are reduced by lot to 9.

These 9 people choose 45 other people.

These 45 people are reduced by lot to 11.

These 11 people choose 41 other people.

These 41 people elect the doge.

Funny that many Americans blame their electoral system for being complicated. You may think what you want about the Venetian system but it guaranteed what was probably the most stable government in the history of mankind.

By the way, despite the fact he was elected for life, the power of the chief of state in Venice was very much limited.

He could not appear in public without other officials present (security from populism). He could not meet foreign diplomats or open foreign dispatches without other officials present (security from collusion with foreign governments). He could not possess any property in a foreign land.

However, he had a nice place to live.

[gringolet]

rating whether polyamory would solve famous love triangle plots

Arthur/Guinevere/Lancelot (Arthuriana): no because Mordred and Agravaine would not be let in on the mutual consent and would still try to catch Guinevere cheating

Tristan/Iseult/Mark (Tristania): absolutely not because Mark is Tristan’s uncle

Tristan/Iseult/Palomides (Tristania): absolutely yes because between Palomides and Iseult all of Tristan’s most unhelpful impulses would be balanced out

Peeta/Katniss/Gale (Hunger Games): polyamory alone cannot defeat an authoritarian dystopia

Cyrano/Roxanne/Christian (Cyrano de Bergerac): solves every problem in the first 3 acts, solves no problems in the 4th

Wesley/Buttercup/Humperdink (The Princess Bride): while Wesley would be happy living as buttercups side piece, the problem is no amount of mutual consent will fulfill prince humperdinks emotional need to be at war. so no

Orsino/Viola/Olivia (Twelfth Night): most of it yes as long as Sebastian fucks that pirate

Heathcliff/Catherine/Edgar (Wuthering Heights): Technically yes but they all have so many emotional issues that new problems would immediately arise and Catherine would still die of being stressed out by the whole thing

Mark Antony/Cleopatra/Caesar (Antony and Cleopatra): well vibes-wise they were probably all fucking in real life and clearly polyamory alone did not save the Roman Republic

Menelaos/Helen/Paris (The Iliad etc): polyamory alone CAN stop the Trojan war as long as the Greeks know Menelaos tops

Florence/The Russian/Svetlana (Chess): polyamory alone cannot stop the Cold War

The Dutchman/Sente/Erik (The Flying Dutchman): solves every interpersonal problem but would actively damn the Dutchman to wander the seas forever

Mathilde/Julien/Mme de Renal (The Red and the Black): a rare case where polyamory would make everything WORSE! Fucking two people at the same time would make poor asexual Julien even more miserable and more people would die. Mme de Renal’s guilt would be even more destructive. Mathilde would suicide bait everyone else involved.

Raoul/Christine/Erik (Phantom of the Opera): probably not but i want to say yes because its such a funny concept

Jacques/Severine/Roubaud (La Bête Humaine): no! Jacques would just sexually commit TWO murders

[emaadsidiki]

Coolness that flows through the old city streets. 😎

[ancientcharm]

The Ides of March. On March 15,44 BC, Julius Caesar was assassinated.

We owe Julius Caesar the famous phrase “the die is cast” (Alea iacta est). He said this in January 49 BC when he led his army across the Rubicon River in northern Italy, after his conquest of Gaul. A positive aspect of him is that he did not seek revenge. He spared the lives of his enemies defeated in the civil war with the intention of turning them into friends and together improving what he called "the new Republic." Among his murderers on that Ides of March were those "friends" whose lives he had spared.

In 59 BC he founded Florentia which later changed its name in Italian to Firenze (Florence). The curious, almost prophetic thing is that Florentia in Latin means “flowering” and it was in Florence where emerged the cultural movement known as the Renaissance (a flowering of art of the Ancient Rome).

In 46 BC he modified the Roman calendar, creating the novelty that the year began on January 1 and not March 1 as in the previous calendar in addition to the novelty of the leap year. 

Julius Caesar, one of the most famous men, had a passionate relationship with one of the most famous women, the Ptolemaic Egyptian queen Cleopatra VII. They had a son, named Caesarion. After Cleopatra's arrival in Rome in the year 46, Caesar himself officially recognized the child as his son.

He had a daughter named Julia, whom Caesar married to Pompey Magnus, who would later be his greatest rival and whom he defeated during the civil war at the Battle of Pharsalia. Julia and the baby died during childbirth. Caesar adopted his grandnephew, Octavian as his son and sole heir. Years later, Octavian ordered the execution of young Caesarion, days after Cleopatra committed suicide.

Caesar proclaimed himself Dictator for 10 years, something completely unusual. The position of Dictator was an occasion in which a man was elected by the Senate for a period of 6 months to 1 year to make special laws, in times of war or serious crisis. In addition to the calendar,Julius Caesar has also forever changed the meaning of being a Dictator. 

He became a dictator in the modern sense of the word: he was populist, he did things to please the Roman people to the point that they idolized him. Although it must be recognized that he did very favorable things for the people.

Shortly after, he proclaimed himself Dictator for life, this sealed his tragic end. 

Senators agreed to assassinate him.The conspiracy was carried out in the house of Servilia ,mother of Brutus and lover of Julius Caesar for years. 

They stabbed him 23 times, taking him by surprise in the Senate.

After years of civil war caused by this assassination, his grandnephew Octavian,Caesar Augustus, became the first Emperor of Rome. Unlike his uncle and adoptive father, Octavian was very vengeful; Within a few years, all of Caesar's adversaries and assassins were dead.

Historians agree that with exceptions, such as Cato, Cicero, Brutus or Cassius,who sincerely believed that the Republic was in danger, the others did not decide to assassinate him out of fear of a monarchy, as they hypocritically claimed, but out of envy and ambition; They did not want to be republicans, they wanted to be JULIUS CAESAR, the same desire of every authoritarian ruler from then to the present.

[brother-emperors]

hi!! i’m a classics major and am so entranced by your art and how you interact with history and literature, it really inspires me and expands my brain all the time. SO spicy.

anyways, I was wondering if you’d be comfortable talking a bit about your degree (s) and how they’ve influenced your artistic/critical analytical processes??

oh man, I have exactly zero degrees. like a true jester, I went to a trade art school, so I don't even have an art related degree, I've got a certification of surviving hell completion

the way art and history interact for me is that a lot of it circles back to trying to find ways to talk about something. history doesn't necessarily repeat, but it often rhymes, haunts, and cannibalizes. some eras of history are equal parts history and a stage, and a stage serves as a place to say something without necessarily having to be in it. the bossism politics of the philippines rhymes with the faction politics of the late republic more often than it doesn't. watching the marcoses crawl back into power was like watching the medici return to florence. duterte said he was like julius caesar crossing the rubicon, and over 6,000 were murdered under his regime. somethings are the same.

a lot of it feels like a puzzle, and I like it when pieces come together. more often than not, there's something current going on that prompts me to look back into history for something comparable, either as a stage, or just to feel like I'm not losing my mind, that other people had to deal with this shit too.

I was a teenager when the original assassin's creed games were coming out, and I used to go to libraries with other fans and we'd just sit in the non fiction sections and read everything that was on a shelf, and then go outside or whatever and start talking about where the games diverged from history and try to figure out what the next game would do based on whatever we learned. and I just kind of. kept doing that even when I stopped playing the games because the story sucked ass, but because there's already a second intersection of fiction working along side historical analysis, it unlocks a bunch of other stuff in the back of my mind while I take notes on something.

the gore you read in the thebaid reminds me a lot of imperial chines torture literature, and now we've got imperial horror and while we've moved out of the ancient Mediterranean but it's a whole body of work that I'm now looking at while thinking about rome, and somewhere in there, I'll probably find some literary theme that's cool and I'll start researching whether or not someone's examined like. the renaissance from that lens. what does the gore mean. what happens when history unfairly maligns and scapegoats someone. what happens when a foundational sacrifice goes wrong.

one of the most gut wrenching things I ever read was about how rome took any record of spartacus' words and buried it, and now I spend too much time thinking about what words we put in the mouths of dead people.

[grand-army-radio]

This song goes out to Wrecker.