Ursus

I have read Roman Life and submitted a review. While most UNRV regulars may find it of some worth, I believe Pertinax and Nephele in particular would enjoy it.

"Empire" is among my leading candidates, although TNT did a remake of Spartacus which was lame, and I believe it was USA who did a production on Attila the Hun which was even worse.

Kids should be eaten and not seen.

.

Julian belonged to a very philosophical bent on paganism that was practiced by some of the intellectual elite in Late Antiquity. Julian wanted a paganism whose theology and ontology were heavily influenced by the pantheistic and theurgic Hellenic philosophies. Most telling of all, he wanted a structure and clergy similar to Christianity (bishops, priests, etc), and he wanted paganism to take a new social charitable role. Obviously mainstream Greco-Roman paganism was beginning to lose out to the assorted mass of mystery cults, of which Christianity was one. I honestly think by his day it was a question of whether the Isaic cult or Christianity would become the dominant religion. Julian wanted to make paganism as a whole more competitive by reforming it along all the lines that made Mystery religions so appealing - a definite guiding purpose and moral code attached to a belief in salvation, a definite clergical hierarchy to ensure control, and an emphasis on providing aid and comfort to members in the face of crumbling social institutions. Mithraism per se could never have become the main religion as it excluded half the human race - women.

I heard llamas can be quite .. embracing.. on a cold, lonely Chilean night...

The otherwise very rational Augusta seems to have an illogical antipathy to our Ancient Egyptian friends. I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. I find them refreshingly different. Not completely Western but not wholly alien; close enough to our heritage to understand, but unique enough to provide a contrast to normative Western values. The contrast exists insofar as Ancient Egypt was arguably the least warlike of the great ancient cultures, having achieved a true empire only under the New Kingdom phase of their long history. While long odes have been composed to the Pharoahs' might, warrior ethos existed only as a means to end. The central Egyptian concept was Ma'at - a word that blends our concepts of truth, justice, harmony, peace, divine inspiration. War was simply a means to fight off the forces of chaos encroaching on Ma'at. In Greece and Rome, by contrast, warrior arete and virtus were ends onto themselves. While I recognize that warrior might helped forge and defend Hellenic and Roman culture, I also can grow tired of reading the national epics of those cultures, where warrior princes and warlords recite long deeds of their bloody conquests. The literatue of Ancient Egypt recovered from papyrus and heiroglyphs conveys a more peaceful culture. Some of it is strikingly modern. I have recently read Ancient Egyptian Literature: An Anthology by John Foster. I won't do a full review for the site as I don't think enough people would be truly interested. But I do want to make a few brief points. The literature seems to be divided into four main varieties. One are long hymns to Egypt's various gods, especially to the solar gods of the dynasty. Some of these can become rambling and monotonous, but at other times they are strikingly beautiful and - dare I say? - inspirational. I would compare them to the Hebrew Psalms on that level. Interestingly, some of the Egyptians apparently felt there was an ultimate unity somewhere behind the polytheism, not unlike the later Greco-Roman Platonists. Another is what I would term "folklore" - not quite on the level of mythology, but age old stories told over campfires. They are told from the perspective of people caught up in exotic adventures, who ultimately escape their troubles by living according to the Egypt's values of peace, harmony, justice and divine guidance. Another is what has been termed Wisdom Literature. This is usually a royal personage or scribal authority dispensing fatherly advice to a filial listener. The obvious love and concern that pervaded Egyptian familial life is felt here, in contrast to Republican Rome where excessive displays of such emotions were considered unmanly. The sage advice teaches the importance of a good education (lest one be forced to groan and sweat as a common laborer), the dangers of excessive alcohol and sex, and the honor of living a dignified life according to cultural norms. Aside from the particular religion and professions discussed, the advice could be given today by any caring father. And finally we have the love poems. Both sexes speak in the love poems. And in contrast to some areas of Greco-Roman culture, where romantic love might be considered divine madness and unhealthy, romantic love was perfectly normal. They loved on both an emotional and physical level, and no one lifted an eyebrow. All in all, there is a great deal the Ancient Egyptians have to commend to themselves, if you look beyond the funerary monuments and god-kingship which forms most people's impressions of Egypt. There was that - but there was also a people who loved life, who loved the peaceful side of life, and who I daresay are sometimes closer to my own values than the warrior or intellectual elite of Greece and Rome.

Asimov stated he wrote the Foundation trilogy after reading Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. As far as his law, I find it bollocks. It clearly ignores the fact that from Augustus to Trajan, the empire was expanding, despite the fact there were a variety of weak emperors reigning. In fact, the only real reason Britannia was invaded was to confer military legitimacy on a weak ruler - Claudius.

What is the exact Latin that Julian is using? "Res publica" means "public thing" or that which is common to the public. It's often translated as Republic, although a more generic translation would be "Commonwealth" which doesn't imply a specific form of government. Likewise, "Imperium Romanorum" means the zone of power and authority that belongs to the Roman People, but which has come down in English as Roman Empire.

Yep, been there and done that. But when they rebel I simply retake the city and slaughter them, which gives me some nice influx of capital from all the looting.

Pantheistic philosophies and salvation religions aside, the most common belief seems to have been that on death a person would have joined Dii Manes, the spirits of the dead. Roman domestic cult took the view something survived death, but there was no heaven or hell, just a kind of spirit world that somehow intersected with the world of the living. Roman domestic religion actually centered on the worship of one's ancestors and local spirits of the dead. They spent their lives making offerings to their ancestors, and when they died they felt their ancestors would honor them. I submit such a view of the afterlife makes one less timid about death than either an agnostic view on the complete end of existence, or a Monotheistic belief in possible eternal torment. Die in battle, committ suicide, catch the plague? No matter - you all go the same place, and your ancestors carry on your memory with religious ritual.

Mmmmm. Chocolate.

Mod's note: this thread refers to this recently posted review, in case anyone was wondering: http://www.unrv.com/book-review/justinians-flea.php As I told Pertinax elsewhere, I had no desire to read anything else on Byzantium until I read his review. Seems like an intriguing book.

Yeah, good point. It was a devil's bargain with the Vandals. And the devils took their due when they seized North Africa, thus ending any hope left for the West.

I think it was the Hunnic hordes pushing behind them that caused them to seek entry into the Empire - they had nowhere else to go. The Empire couldn't possibly assimilate all the Germanic supertribes that had aggregated thanks to the Hun's advance. And the empire's failure to exterminate the hordes is what led to the fall.

For a second there I thought we were having another discussion on Showtime's "The Tudors." Then I realized I was in the Colosseum folder.

I'm surprised Lost_Warrior hasn't jumped up and down kicking and screaming over the gladiator book.

This question concerning one person could have been privately messaged. But since you ask, I suggested the Doc be somehow recognized for her achievements, and the others happily agreed with me. The rest is history.

Happy 52nd. Health and best wishes!

When I was 22, I took a ride on a high speed roller coaster. Unfortunately I was too big for the ride (I'm 6'5'') and couldn't sit my back firmly against the seat. The G forces from the roller coaster seriously whacked my vertebrae out of line. They were crushing my sciatic nerve and I was in great pain. The local chiropractor used some sort of small device to hit the vertebrea back into place. It was painless and after 3 or 4 sessions I was back to normal. No drugs, no surgery. You may want to check into it.

Another glitch I discovered is that in most scenarios, Brittania seems to conquer large chunks of Gaul and Germany, becoming a regional superpower. How and when? And the Arcani .... Roman Ninjas??? I really hope to get cable modem soon so I can download some of these more historical mods. I have written a review of RTW, but if I could boil it down to one sentence, it would be "a nice idea with seriously flawed execution."

I don't know if I know the most, but it's always been an area of interest. Ptolemaic Egypt would also be an excellent topic. The Hellenophiles could chime in on that one.

I'm afraid I can't talk intelligently about this timeperiod of Egyptian history, though I am game if you wish to talk about the glories of Ancient Egypt's New Kingdom era.

The propertied elite of the allied states were generally granted Roman citizenship, and with it the Roman lifestyle. Furthermore, I believe (I'll have to check my sources but I'm rather positive) Augustus actively encouraged native princes to study in Rome. These highly Romanized elites were then placed as commanders of their own troops to serve as auxillia alongside the legions. After the civil wars Italy experienced an economic boom. Most Italians found ventures in business more profitable than legion service. And with a greatly expanded empire, the borders were now far away from Italy. It is not surprising many Italians decided to ignore legion service. The one exception seems to have been the new Praetorian guard which offered higher pay and status, and which was stationed in and outside Rome. The obvious solution to any manpower problems was to use the natives of allied states, using their highly Romanized elite as go-betweens. In the course of 20 or 25 years of service the soldiers would have become greatly Romanized upon their discharge as citizens, and this had the desired effect of Romanizing large segments of the native population. More than the prized posession of Roman ciitzenship, the natives could generally find better pay and better medical attention in the legions than in their own homelands. One also has to remember that in many of the native states, such as the Gallic tribes, the way of the warrior was still a cultural ideal in itself, and there were simply more opportunities for a warrior in the Empire than anywhere else. It seems to me it was a win-win situation for everybody. Only in the later empire with the massive influx of true barbarians (people who didn't even have the cultural development of the Gauls) did the natives change the Roman army more than the army changed them.

An interesting and diverse crop of books. A little something for everyone.