Ursus

The highest cultural virtue in ancient Greece was arete - honor and excellence from being great at something. For most Greek city-states outside Athens, warrior arete a la the Homeric heroes was the highest ideal. Falling far short of that goal would bring dishonor and disgrace. Other cultural taboos in Ancient Greece would be: not respecting the dead and not burying them properly (see Achilles dragging Hector's corpse around in his chariot), breaking an oath sworn before the gods (for which the offender was required to dedicate a statue to the gods), patricide, and (before the Hellenistic era) adopting the "effeminate" and "subservient" manners of Orientalism.

After the opening act, the movie quickly lost its charm for me.

Hail and good fortune!

I've never actually stepped foot in any of these cities. Hard to judge. Also, what time period are we talking? Rome before the Caesars was basically a boring, dirty Latin town. I think Alexandria in its heyday would have been extremely interesting.

It's called _Experiencing Rome_. I will be doing a review on it shortly.

The Church has been relentlessly assualted in recent years, and all the more so when Cardinal Ratzinger took over. Some of the criticism is certainly well deserved. Some of it is just more sour grapes from the usual suspects. But I suspect the Church is simply responding to its critics. Maligning the credibility of some author who admittedly took many liberties with his "facts" is a safer topic than, say, sexual abuse among clergy.

I resurrected this old thread to make one snide comment - I thought the 10 minute gladiator scene in episode 11 of HBO Rome with Pullo and Vorenus outdid the entire "Gladiator" movie.

No single person was being targeted, although it does seem throughout the site lately there have been some heated arguments from the same personalities. Perhaps, in the future, agreeing to disagree would prove the better solution. Especially on topics that are purely subjective and have nothing to do with Rome anyway. Having said that, if someone needs a breather, then by all means take one. I would rather see that than someone become too abrasive, forcing the Legati to place them on moderated status.

This thread is one step away from being sent to the Arena. Additionally, let's all remember to use a modicum of tact. Becoming heated over hypothetical crap that cannot ultimately be proven should be beneath your collective dignitas.

The staff and membership likewise welcomes you. We try to make the best site possible, and we encourage sincere members to assist us in making it even better.

An interesting book I am currently reading makes the point that different people in different times and places had different ideas about what constituted Roman identity ... even before the West fell. The local elites through the empire were keen to link themselves to the imperial grandeur of Rome ... but how a Celt, an African and a Greek lived their day-to-day lives as citizens of Rome left room for considerable diversity. There was thus never one idea of Rome. There was a vague and overarching idea of power and majesty, of endless and eternal empire, to which local cultures could append themselves while still allowing room for local expression. The Roman empire was a sprawling commonwealth of diverse cities connected to each other by the army, by roads, and by Greco-Latin education. I think we have to take this in mind when evaluating the Byzantines and their claim to Romanatis.

The federal religious shrine? This is an amazing discovery for Etruscan scholars! I am elated.

I'm not sure what you're asking. The novel makes certain claims about the history of the Christian religion which some have contested. Religious Tolerance.org is a Canadian concern that tries to promote objective information on different religious groups in the interests of diversity and peace. I have found them to be good people. The article I linked to tries to refute some of the novel's claims. This book is indeed very popular, especially among the alternative religious crowd. I know many neopagans who cite the book as fact when they speak of the "evil conspiracies of the Church" or whatever. Unfortunately a lot of the book seems to be pure fiction. Nonetheless the book proposes some very Gnostic views on Christianity. Gnosticism was an early competitor of Paulist Christianity that was eventually snuffed out by Constantine's successors. Lately there seems to be an upsurge of interest in "alternative" versions of Christianity like Gnosticism. Versions that are more friendly to women, homosexuals, the environment, individual mystical experience, etc. It fits the politics of the time.

Since this topic has evolved into a discussion of the book rather than a religion relevant to the Roman Empire, I'll have to move it to the afterhours forum. Here is a link that claims to refute some of the "facts" set forth by the novel: http://www.religioustolerance.org/davinci3.htm

He seemed like a nice guy. But given his line of work there was always a danger something like this would happen. I prefer to see my wild animals at the zoo, not up close and personal.

*face|palm* *head|desk*

I listed my general reasons for Augustus. An expanison of the empire followed by peace, prosperity, urban and cultural rejuvenation. And quite simply one of the smoothest politicians ever. On a personal note, I simply like the man. I've often wondered how I would have turned out if I were thrust back in time to the Late Republic. I like Augustus am not a military man and could not conquer Gaul like Caesar. In fact, I'd be quite happy to stay in my tent with food, wine and comely slave girls while my legates did all the work. But perhaps like Augustus I have a certain strategic vision in mind, and an understanding of culture. A systems builder, in other words - the system being the empire and its institutions. Yes, I like Augustus because I like how he thinks. He set the tone of the empire for the next 300 years. Not many people have the long term vision to cast a shadow like that.

Antonio Banderas ... quoting Greek philosophy and chasing after strapping young boys. Sure...

I am pleased we have more people interested in the empire.

Yep. It was the ancient equivalent of a protection amulet, designed to ward off evil spirits and the like. Remember the myth of how Minerva (Athena) put a gorgon on her shield to make herself all the more of a terrifying warrior? What is good for a goddess is good for the common people.

I've never actually read the book, and really don't intend to. From what I've heard of it, it does seem to take a few liberties. However, at the heart of the matter is a different view on Christianity from what the Roman Catholic Church sanctions. A Gnostic view. Gnosticism is slowly gaining ground again. Seems to be the perfect version of Christianity for those who want Christ but don't want the patriarchy and rigid church hierarchy. Perhaps a discussion of ancient Gnosticism and its modern revival could prove informative and entertaining.

Great review, Pentagathus. And congratulations to Mr. Dalby.

Congratulations to all the winners.

Excellent find. Another potential mark on my wish list. I'm not sure what Cicero would think about being compared to Bill Clinton.

I intend to get Goldsworthy and Warrior as soon as I finish my Legate book give-a-way.