Ursus

Paganism wasn't monolithic. Different cultures believed in different things. Even within a culture, different cults might believe in different things. The plethora of varying religious cults reached its apex within the Roman Empire. As far as "loving they neighbor" Stoic philosophy was preaching this centuries before Christ.

Always wondered how you would say "Hey, baby, come to these gladiatorial games often?"

Marriage for the upper classes was a socio-political alliance of families, and a way to produce an heir to carry on the family name. For the lower classes, marriage was probably mostly needed to have extra hands to work around the farm or family business. Although as both agriculture and industry came to be taken over by large companies using slave labor, the need for procreation lessened. Indeed, for the urban proletariat out of work and living on bread and circuses, children would be seen just as more mouths to feed. In the late Republic the birthrate dropped dramatically. Social conservatives like Augustus tried to promote a return to marriage and children, but the results were mixed at best.

Some of the Roman rich practiced a degraded form of Epicureanism which held unrestrained hedonism as the highest ideal. But the extent of these orgies of food and sex is probably exaggerated by Christians with an axe to grind against pagan society, or by purist conservatives longing for the good old days of the Republic. To be very blunt, most Romans couldn't afford to waste a single bread crumb, let alone vomit away a fine meal as a matter of course.

Ah. Welcome. One of the site founders, Primus Pilus, is writing an ongoing summary of Roman political history. He has covered the early years to about Domitian, if you want to take a look: http://www.unrv.com/empire/roman-history.php Aside from that there are dozens of primary sources on Roman history, which I myself am starting to tackle seriously. As for Nova Roma, this site is simple education and comraderie and nothing like a self-proclaimed "micro-nation". It makes no claims to being a reborn Roman Empire. Just about everyone you meet here is a decent sort.

Welcome. Exactly which LJ friend were you? Don't recognize the handle ....

I'm going to go for a man most people have never heard of before: George Kennan, the architect of American containment of Soviet expansion.

I am moving this topic to "suggestion and feedback" and I am expanding on it. Here is a free forum to voice concerns about discussions on the site. Without micro-managing everything, what can we do to inspire good discussions? And what are the sections of the site that need most improving? If you feel uncomfortable expressing your concerns in public, please e-mail me of or one of the admins in private. Thanks.

PS ... I am pinning Hamilcar Barca's essay as example of the kind of contribution I would like to see more of in this folder. Cheers.

It looks like you nicely fixed all the little bugs from the upgrade. I think it looks great. Your efforts are appreciated by me at least.

Hannibal, being Punic, probably had darker Semitic features than what these Anglo actors would suggest. I guess if you applied a liberal dose of makeup to Owen or Russel, it might work ....

P.S. --- the following gives a brief overview of the Roman government and Sulla's changes to it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comitia_Centuriata

This is an extremely interesting topic, and I hope we can get into it a bit. Most historians see Sulla

This article touched me for some reason. I don't know why. I'm glad the GI's could help the German townsmen.

I'd really hate to start setting rules for things like this, but I've been known to send the worst examples to the graveyard, and to basically ignore the rest. I agree it gets bad at times. It's hard for me to moderate the military forum because of it.

Mod's note: the half of this thread that evolved off topic has been removed to the after hours forums, where it may be debated there. Please keep this thread confined to Rome. Thanks.

Viggen showed me how to do these complicated splits (thanks, Viggen). This evolving topic on the morality of modern states and twentieth century violence may now continue unmolested. I simply felt it was off topic relative to the original thread, so I moved it here. Have fun.

I'm a little scared ....

I was going to split the topic and send the "modern" section of it to the social forum where it could be discussed unabated, but apparently it won't let me do this. If the topic drifts much further away from the original focus of *ancient Roman* morals, then I'll have to lock it. And while I find the conversation interesting, I do find it going off topic, retarded gay whales and all.

Excellent!

I want it for Christmas

If it didn't come referenced with a news story, I would assume it's another petty Urban Legend spread on the net. Of course, if any stranger offered one some free perfume in a parking lot, I would hope the person in question would find it sufficiently weird to run away.

And happy 20th to Silentium.

I would carve out the North Eastern United States (Mid Atlantic, Great Lakes, New England) along with the Eastern provinces of Canada if they wanted to join. I would call this ... Atlantica. We would be known for a sizeable economy along with relative social diversity and tolerance. We would combine a president and a multi-party democracy like they do in France. There would be relatively limited government in both economic and personal spheres, and a complete separation of church and state. All Atlantica troops overseas would be withdrawn. Instead we would beef up internal law enforcement and intelligence to deal with any terrorist threats. Since there wouldn't be any Atlantica troops within 5000 miles of Mecca, perhaps terrorism wouldn't be a major concern to begin with. We would strengthen trading and political ties with Western Europe, as the "establishment " in Atlantica is noted for being old money with close ties and heritage to Europe. We would try to institute a North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement to replace the now defunct North American Free Trade Agree ment. What happens to the rest of North America is open to question. I suspect that the West and the South would separate to form Pacifica and Dixie, respectively. We would maintain trading relations with Pacifica and Dixie if it suited our purposes. However, given the cultural and political differences that Atlantica has with Pacifica and Dixie, it is doubtful that a political reunion would ever be tempted again. If we looked for allies, it would be with Europe, specifically Britain.