Talk:Pisonian conspiracy

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 19, 2014 and April 19, 2020.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The article calls this a "major turning point" in Nero's rule, but neglects to say how or why Nero's rule was altered as a consequence of this plot. C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.121.40 (talk) 22:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a small explanation regarding this.Derekpatterson (talk) 08:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the basis for stating that Galba's designated heir Lucius Piso Licinianus was the brother of this Piso? There's no mention of that in the article on Piso Licinianus.Cenedi (talk) 18:00, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see no-one has answered this. In fact, since the Piso Licinianus article seems fairly certain that he was born to the gens Licinius and adopted into the Calpurnii Pisones, the only kind of brother he could be would be an adopted one - but it's still unclear why he is assumed to be the brother of the Piso of the Pisonian conspiracy. Tacitus would surely have made mention of this in his narration of Galba's choosing an heir, but he doesn't.Cenedi (talk) 11:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

========================

This sentance would appear to contradict itself:

" Under torture, she revealed details and names, but she remained loyal to the conspiracy and did not betray it.[2]"

How could she have revealed the names and details without betraying the plot?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.136.15.149 (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quite. Haploidavey (talk) 23:38, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The correct version according to Tacitus is her not revealing anything. I corrected this. 129.133.208.230 (talk) 01:12, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of conspirators

I've checked Tacitus, & provided cites from him concerning the names of those killed/exiled/pardoned. Since he spends a lot of space listing those who were executed or committed suicide, I listed the passage next to each name he provides in the text. Which leads to the next issue...

I also checked Suetonius, Dio Cassius, & Plutarch to see if they add anyone not mentioned by Tacitus, & only Dio Cassius names any of the conspirators -- about half a dozen, all of whom are mentioned by Tacitus. I don't know where the other names came from. Since Tacitus lists all of those pardoned or exiled in one chapter, I deleted all of those listed as exiled not included in Tacitus; however, those who died as a result of association with the conspiracy but not mentioned by Tacitus (as far as I can find) I did not remove. I'll leave that for someone else. (BTW, Tacitus lists one more person who died from his complicity in this conspiracy but is not mentioned in this article -- Volusius Proculus (Annales xv.57). I'll leave it to someone else to dispose of those names. -- llywrch (talk) 19:43, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]