Ursus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_%28god%29

Hmmm. Well it's somewhat post-Roman, but its also military related. Hmmm. Tough call. I can't decide. This job is so tough some times. Ahh, we'll move it to the post-Roman folder.

Well, there was still a healthy Celtic legacy lurking in Britain beneath the Roman vaneer. The culture of the invading Germanic hordes was fairly close to the pre-Roman Celts, being rooted in similar tribal values and such. I suspect Celts wouldn't have had much trouble adapting to Germanic ways, aside from obvious language differences. So you have people who are close cousins of the Celts who come and take over the most distant outpost of the Roman empire --- probably didn't take much to de-Romanize Britain. Heavily Romanized celts who had been living in Roman towns for generations and who had been part of the Roman imperial structure would find the transition shocking, but I think the rest of the population would probably be closer in worldview to the Anglo-Saxons than to the Romans.

I was briefly a member of NR, but soon left. I joined for the pagan community, but I didn't quite fit in with their goals and methods. But if that stuff works for you, more power to you. Welcome to this community.

And don't forget the mead!

It might be authentic, it might not be. Like Primus Pilus said, it's probably indisputable they were the first Europeans in North America. I know some Germanic/Norse cultural and religious groups seriously refer to the US & Canada as "Vinland" and the inhabitants of those countries as "Vinnish." They do this in honor of the achievements of the Scandanavian explorers, and to protest the widespread ignorance of those achievements. This may sound pretentious, but consider that America is named after Amerigo Vespucci, an Italian explorer who authorized maps of the new world. If Amerigo was not in fact the first European to draft an accurate map of North American, then maybe

I don't take any risks that don't seem logical. I've nearly had an accident several times on crowded interstate roads, and I figure why push my luck.

I'm very worried that if conservative Islamic forces like the Taliban ever take hold in Egypt, the pyramids and temples might go the way of the Afghan Buddhist statues.

Sonny Bono was a congressman. That's all I have to say.

People in California seem to like Arnie, though. He represents a socially moderate breed of Republican that can be backed by both business interests and suburban soccer moms. It's a winning combination, at least in his state.

But I'll bet he won't even think of stealing a TV again.

Han was in his late twenties, early thirties in the original film, if "Sith" takes place about twenty years before, then Han would have been just a little boy in the ROTS time frame, not enough time to be an imperial officer. I'm also a little puzzled. It takes the Empire about twenty years from Episode III to Episode IV to build the Death Star. From Episode IV to Episode VI there is a span of about four years where the second Death Star is complete enough to be used as a weapon. Doesn't make much sense. I also don't know why OBi Wan seems to have aged about forty years rather than twenty from Episode III to IV. Obi wan also says in Luke's time that the Jedi have been extinct so long they are all but a myth. Well, gee, it's only been twenty years since the Jedi were killed off, that's not enough time to evolve into a half-remembered myth. I don't think Lucas thought this out very well, honestly. But he seems more interested in special effects than plot or character or "mythic" themes. That's the main problem I have with this whole trilogy. :-(

I dont know what you're asking, actually. I think the evolving theme in the thread is which culture or cultures had more of an impact on the development of Western history. On that point, if you look at the legal and governmental systems of the West, most either come from Roman Jurisprudence, or Anglo-Saxon common law. Most of the languages in Western Europe and its former colonies are also either Germanic, Romance or some combination of the two. The Celts used to hold large stretches of Continental Europe, but they were mostly absorbed by Roman and/or Germanic overlords. I'm sure while some traditions and sense of identity survive, they didn't shape the West in the sense that the Romans and the Germanics did. Things might have been very different if the ancient Celtic peoples had united and blocked the rising Roman threat. Rome might have been confined to central and south Italy, or destroyed altogether, and Western Civilization would be Celtic and Germanic. But the Celts couldn't unite, and the rest is history. *shrugs* As an aside, I'm mostly Germanic and Celtic with the standard Native American thrown in the usual mix of a North American mutt. I've always preferred Mediterranean civilizations though. Although I've considered the whole Celto-Roman thing.

Let me reiterate some of my tired arguments. :-) A republic is a compromise between competing leadership groups, which are formally elected by the people but once in office are largely free of the people's whims until the next election. In Roman elections the upper classes had a disproportionate say in the election process ... but then the upper classes were the guardians and servants of Rome, often financing public works out of their own pockets, so they felt they had a right to dominate the process. Modern definitions of egalitarianism would frown on the assumption, but it worked for the Romans through a long stretch of their history. In any event, one of the factions claimed to stand for tradition, the constitution, order, and the wisdom of the ancestors. Another faction claimed to stand for the immediate needs of the people, and particularly the sensitivities of those on the lower rungs. But even the faction that claimed to stand for the people were often from the higher echelons, since, as I said, they dominated the process. Roman politics can

Depends on whom one reads. Some of the Celtophile scholars I have read try to suggest the Celts invented everything since sliced bread. Of course, I think they have a biased agenda to say so. But I was flabbergasted to learn the Celts had (wooden) roads and such before the Roman arrived. In the sum of things I pretty much agree with you that the Greco-Roman influence shaped the continent, the Germanic legacy dominated the anglosphere, and the Celtic legacy outside Ireland is largely overshadowed by the two.

Excellent.

While I am sure some people fought for the Republic out of idealism and traditionalism, I think you have to concede many of the oligarchic families were simply fighting to protect their interests. If you were a provincial, would you rather champion an ultra conservative republican government whose

There is no better example of an oligarchy than the Communist Party, who tried to eliminate distinctions of wealth and power. ;-) Oligarchy is not inherently a function of capitalism or wealth. 1. In every society some people seem more comfortable leading, while others seem more comfortable following. Most people are followers in my experience. They seek not equality and self-rule, but benevolent masters to follow. This is probably horrendously politically incorrect, but it's what I see for myself. I might betray myself as some sort of quasi-conservative or something, but I think it is the natural order of things. I think pure democracy is chaotic and dangerous. There will always be leaders. The only questions are how those leaders are chosen and what kind of powers they are granted by their followers. 2. Wasn

http://swanstrom.org/vikingkittens/index.html

I have to say I'm just not much of a Star Wars fan anymore. I think Lucas started losing it with his Ewok fetish.

The Republic was basically a city-state government that found it increasingly difficult to effectively administer an empire. The Empire worked better, aside from the insane emperors and civil wars.

Most of Caesar's reforms (apotheosis aside) seem to have been reasonable and fairly restrained. If he had not been assassinated, who knows. Maybe he would have become every bit the Oriental tyrant his dectractors claimed he was. Who is to say? But looking at the record, I'd say he was at least marginally better than the provincial Oligarchy he replaced. At least he was a man who could get things done. Certainly his military exploits are legendary, his writings a classic, and his very life a powerful icon of inspiration.

I received my copy today. Looking at it up close, it's actually quite lovely. A handy reference item, to be sure. Thanks, guys.

The grades were: Corax (raven) Nymphus (bride) Miles (soldier) Leo (lion) Perses (Persian) Heliodromus (sun-courier) Pater (father) I'll have to look up the recruitment process later, if there is any information on it.

History Mithras, or Mitra, is a very ancient deity. In the Vedic religions that preceded Hinduism, Mitra is a solar deity of oaths and treaties who is closely connected with the sky god Varuna. In Persian religion, he is also a solar deity of friendship and honesty operating under the supreme god Ahura Mazda. The god has similar roles in these two cultures because they both share an older Indo-European heritage. Apparently Mitra was a comparatively minor deity until the reformer Zoroaster revised Persian religion. In his view the cosmos was divided between a clash of light and darkness, good and evil. Zoroaster was essentially a monotheist, with Ahura Mazda as his one god. But unofficial cults sprung out of Zoroaster