Augusts

What's with the Roman Augusts nomen/cognomen? Is it a mistake? I'm in 55 BC, and half of my family has the Augusts name... I will soon reach the augustan reforms, and it will suck that my FM will change only a letter in his name:laugh4:

Means Exalted or something like that. Gets given to FM who has done something good.

Since i study Latin, and have a pretty decent dictionary, i cannot accept that.

Please don't missunderstand me, but could you give me a source for this statement

:surprised: This really seems like a incredibly obvious orthographic mistake - so exceedingly obvious that nobody seems to have recognized it as such. (I've never played such a long Romani campaign as to encounter this peculiar name..;)

Feel free to correct me, for I have no source except deduction. I am a history expert language is for me but a tool for communication.

My logic was

Augustus "Exalted"
August, a foreign word in English = exalted.

But by all means correct me.

While we are at it.

We all know that failing is Human(e), errare humanum est (sp?)

But, "my Ferret" claims that "Errare non-furritus est as ferrets > humans" is "his" language correct?

Your reasoning as to the cognomen and its specific use is absolutely correct, anubis88' post just seems to be aimed at the obvious spelling discrepancy Augustus/Augusts.

Apropos 'errare humanum est' - 'infurritum est errare' ('It's not ferret-like to err') or - rather categorical - 'furrito errare non est.' ('There's absolutely no way for a ferret to err') - correct, anubis88?

Well we all know what Augustus means, but i'm talking about Augusts (the u is missing)

EDIT: Lucretius was faster :D

also, i apologize, but i can't understand what you mean after "while were at it". :(

@Lvcretivs
I doubt that it's just a spelling mistake. After all it wouldn't make any sense to have an Augustus so soon. I remeber someone posted a screen shot before 200bc and already had a general Avgvsts

@anubis88
Hmm, a veritable enigma. Could it possibly be a mere technical issue, e.g. a problem with the internal naming mechanisms? 'Avgvstus' (regular/anachronistic occurring cognomen) conflicting with 'Augustus' trait/ 'Avgustvs' reform cognomen, leaving 'Avgvsts' as a workaround ?? ['Avgvsts' is - in the conventions of Roman personal names - obviously nonsensically incorrect ;)]
@Macilrille
:inquisitive:...Ferrets?

This little bandit... he claims that Ferrets > Humans and that Ferrets never err...

That is a bit OT though and merely highlights my budding madness :-)

Lol...

So does anyone know the point of Avgusts? It's not letting me sleep right