caldrail

I don't watch a lot of television these days but today I came across a program detailing political events at the close of Second World War. It focused primarily on Poland, and whilst the allies had agreed at the Yalta Conference about the fate of that nation, Stalin had little intention of honouring his part of the bargain. Despite the grass roots comradeship Great Britain and Russia made uncomfortable allies. The Second World War had started over the question of Polish security and the Cold War began to rear its ugly head over Poland as well, as Stalin denied the Polish people self determination despite American pressure.and dramatically increased tension in post-war Europe. Churchill had always warned against the possibility of Russian expansion across Europe and on the 22nd May 1945, asked his military planners to prepare Operation Unthinkable - The British attack on Soviet Russia. In the opinion of one individual involved in planning this venture - it might take a very long time to win. Given the recent experience of the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe units struggling with the climatic conditions and the vast demoralising open spaces of eastern Europe, one wonders what the British could actually do about it. It is ironic of course that the Russian people were convinced (largely by offical propaganda) that the West were about to launch a full scale invasion of the Soviet Union for something like forty or fifty years. Were the Russian government aware of Operation Unthinkable via the communist sympathisers lurking in Whitehall? Or was it merely the legacy of Stalins paranoia?

There is a 'gladiator school' operating somewhere, and I understand that most people who take part are naturally cautious , blunt weapons notwithstanding. Except the Germans. They 'really go for it' apparently. You have been warned.

TV personalities often describe Swindon as dull and rainy. Well, nothing has happened in the last two days and today... Yes... It's raining. So I'm sat in the library typing this out desperately trying to think of something meaningful to write. Life, The Universe, And Everything You can tell I'm bored, right? In todays blog I address the most fundamental question of about everything. Douglas Adams attempted this and got the answer of 42. Can I do better? Lets start at the beginning. The Big Bang. Now this is odd, because the universe contains everything there was, is, and ever will be. Now the religious people among us will be already shrugging and claiming their particular god invented the core of energy that spawned our existence in the first palce with a flick of his pinkie. Let There Be Explosions? It seems so. The thing is, the universe is such a wierd place. If you go right down to the minimal level possible, it turns out that the universe has a frame rate. No really it does. For anyone who isn't a computer gamer that means that time is composed of lots of freeze frame moments, one after the other. God has a pretty good PC though because he gets frame rates something of the order of 1034 per second, and thats quite a lot. Smooth action. Then there's this feeling that whatever choice I make, there will always be obstructions. And eventually you have to face the Boss at the end of a level. There's no getting away from it. I'm living in a virtual computer game. Sims Swindon in 3D. When you consider that, 42 does seem a bit lame doesn't it? TV Advert of the Week In their end-of-series episode of Top Gear, the tem were tasked to come up with television adverts for the new diesel Golf Sciroocco. It was quite amusing, but if I were brutally honest, I actually preferred Jeremy Clarksons "It's Explosive!" ad, the one he did first. Simple, visually impressive, and none of that arty nonsense (though I confess I did like the "Berlin to Warsaw" joke too). Explosions. We love 'em don't we?

No. There was one 'major battle' and Spartacus lost it. Most of his victories were not great battles in any sense of the word. I've already answered your question about how Spartacus carried on for as long as he did, facts the Romans themselves observed even if you haven't. They were careless, fightimng with troops under par to say the least, and weren't used to dealing with people who thought outside the box. Of course Crassus used large numbers of troops. He wanted the man surrounded and finished off come what may. Always attack from at least three times their number is the old military axiom. And since the Romans were careless enough to allow Spartacus to get away with early on, he had accrued a fair number of followers, most of whom he precious little control over. You were right. The relevant facts are there. It's just that you prefer the fantasy.

A great general, unlike Garibaldi Karl Marx The description of Spartacus as a general emerges not from history, but his place in the marxist ideology. The question should be asked however why Karl Marx considered Spartacus a great general at all. It wasn't because of his military deeds, but rather that he committed them in an ancient class struggle, which of course was the political invention of the recent past. More importantly, Spartacus was viewed by Marx as a charismatic figure who could inspire the working classes of the Italian mainland to throw off their masters yoke. His military achievements were therefore beside the point. Marx wanted a leader. A hero. The two main accounts of Spartacus come from Appian and Plutarch, and they disagree to the extent to which Spartacus led the escape and the rebellion that followed. To Appian, he was the ringleader, the man who persuaded the gladiators to escape. To Plutarch, he was a man who became the leader as events pushed him to the fore. There is an element of doubt here. Are these descriptions decended from eye-witness accounts, or the literary devices of Roman historians seeking to establish a character? Since most of Spartacus's followers either died in battle or were crucified along the Appian Way, it's difficult to see how an accurate depiction of Spartacus could be made. At their head were two Celts, who are designated by their slave names Crixus and Oenomaus, and the Thracian Spartacus. The latter, perhaps a scion of the noble family of the Spartacids which attained even to royal honours in its Thracian home and in Panticapaeum, had served among the Thracian auxillaries in the Roman army, had deserted and gone as a brigand to the mountains, and had been there recaptured and destined for the gladiatorial games. A History Of Rome (Theodor Mommsen) Here lies the core of the problem with Spartacus. It's the romantic illusion of his story, the assumed nobility of the man in the popular imagination that people want, and for that reason, they ascribe virtues to him he never would have had in real life. It's much the same as the representation of King Arthur as a noble and chivralous knight in shing armour, when he was more likely a dark age warrior who is described by contemporary writers as something less than the hero of legend. Robin Hood is another example - turned by romance into a disposessed lord fighting against tyranny by noble revolution, instead of the medieval thief he would have been. Mommsen describes him as a scion of his people. To his mind, it was unthinkable that a common man would show the nobility and talent of leadership which in his day was considered the preserve of the upper classes. Mommsen compounds this romantic expression by stressing that the family of Spartacus might even have been royalty amongst his people. It seems unlikely that a prince would seek to fight for Rome as a common soldier in the Auxillaries, and Mommsen either ignores or isn't aware that Spartacus is his stage name - even though he mentions the two Celtic leaders as having slave names themselves. In the six hundred and seventy-eighth year of Rome, Marcus Licinius Lucullus, the cousin of that Lucullus who had carried on the war against Mithridates, obtained the province of Macedonia. A new war, too, suddenly sprung up in Italy; for eighty-four gladiators, led by Spartacus, Crixus, and Oenomaus, having broken out of a school at Capua, made their escape; and, wandering over Italy, kindled a war in it, not much less serious than that which Hannibal had raised; for, after defeating several generals and two consuls of the Romans, they collected an army of nearly sixty thousand men. They were, however, defeated in Apulia by the proconsul Marcus Licinius Crassus; and, after much calamity to Italy, the war was terminated in its third year. Historiae Romanae Breviarium (Eutropius) It seems then the legend of Spartacus was already established in the fourth century during the reign of Jovian. Eutropius of course wasn't writing from first hand experience or the word of witnesses. His sources were Suetonius, Livy, and an unknown history now lost to us. His assertion that Rome was in as great a danger as during the Hannabalic War is there for literary purposes. Eutropius gives Hannibal twenty three paragraphs compard to the single entry that mentions Spartacus. More pointedly, Hannibal was a days march from an undefended Rome after the defeat of Cannae, named the "Fourth and almost fatal wound" by the historian Florus, who completely ignores the Spartacus Revolt in his survey of the various conflicts of that period. Spartacus was at no time within reach of such a serious victory over the Roman Republic. If there prove to be any persons who take an interest in these books, let them remember to discriminate between "strategy" and "stratagems," which are by nature extremely similar. For everything achieved by a commander, be it characterized by foresight, advantage, enterprise, or resolution, will belong under the head of "strategy," while those things which fall under some special type of these will be "stratagems." The essential characteristic of the latter, resting, as it does, on skill and cleverness, is effective quite as much when the enemy is to be evaded as when he is to be crushed. Since in this field certain striking results have been produced by speeches, I have set down examples of these also, as well as of deeds. Strategems (Frontinus) Frontinus does indeed provide many examples of strategems (by which he means "tactics") and specifically we do see some of those attributed to Spartacus, who is not described as a general in the text. The historian isn't concerned with the "strategy" of Spartacus, merely the tactics he used to good effect, and the whole of Frontinus's work is to collect such anecdotes as examples for the commanders of his day to read as inspiration for their own efforts. It isn't just the personality of Spartacus that has been romanticised, or his military ability, but also his role in the pages of history. Worst still, he has been made a patron of the class struggle and representative of an idealistic view of the ephemeral fight against tyranny. Spartacus means the fire and spirit, heart and soul, the will and deed of the revolution of the proletariat... Spartacus means every hardship and every desire for happiness, all committment to the struggle of the class concious proletariat. Spartacus means socialism and world revolution... Gessamelte Reden Und Schriften (Karl Liebknecht) Inspiring words perhaps but the real Spartacus was not concerned with freedom for the common man. He lived in an age when slavery was nothing more than an accepted part of life. I doubt very much the real Spartacus shared the moral outrage we see expressed today on that subject. Certainly he wouldn't have cared for having been enslaved - who does? - but remember that this was done as punishment for his brigandage. Whether Spartacus saw that as just is another matter. His escape from the ludus of Lentulus Batiatus was not part of some noble plan to bring down Roman society. There's no doubt he had in mind to save his own life. He was apparently in training for an imminent spectacular, an event in which he may well have been killed for public entertainment. The usual interpretation is that Spartacus was trained as a gladiator, which would imply a professional fighter, and indeed his legend reinforces that view. However, we need to view this in terms of the period in which he was condemned Ad Ludum. In this period the popularity of gladiatorial games was soaring, and centered upon Campania, as the arenas of the later empire had yet - particularly under the Augustan franchise as cities vied with one another for civic achievements and the state sponsorship they could win by emulating Rome. It has become recognised that gladiators of that era were harshly treated. In fact, it was the revolt of Spartacus that was to spawn many changes in the imperial period to improve security and one that also saw the rise of the volunteer fighter, a trained and valuable athlete, a development that Spartacus never experienced. For him, his imminent death was something he chose not to accept. A coward he was not, but to die for public entertainment was more than he could bear. Again we run the risk of romanticising the man. Spartacus was at heart a non-conformist. His taste for adventure had seen him leave home and join the auxillaries whom he later deserted from. Another misinterpretation of the legend is to assume that the auxilaries were a coherent military unit much like the modern day. Study of the revolt demonstrates that the legions of the time were of poor quality. Many refused to fight, others ran in panic when suprised, a feature of poorly organised and ill-disciplined troops throughout the ages. Spartacus was one of those characters who find themselves unable to obey orders and run with the crowd - he was at heart a rebellious man. Whilst many prefer the noble hero (and general) of legend, it should be realised that Spartacus was of a larcenous nature, and the theft of wealth and resources from the people of Campania as he established a bandit camp on the slopes of Vesuvius was merely a return to his favourite lifestyle. Of course the locals were indignant and attempted to oust him without success, calling upon Rome to defend their security. The response was Clodius Glaber who blockaded the path leading down from the bandits mountain retreat. Spartacus famously had his men slide down the mountainside on vines and suprised the Roman sentries from an unexpected direction. There wasn't much of a fight to it. Startled and paniced, the Romans ran off. Publius Varinius arrived with reinforcements. His troops were suffering from the damp climate, disease, and according to Mommsen - cowardice and insubordination thinned the ranks. Such was the poor state of morale that when ordered to advance against the bandit camp which is recorded as being pitched down from the mountain at that point. Was Spartacus geting the hint it was time to move on? At any rate, his victory of Varinius was against troops in no better shape to fight than those of Glaber. Whilst considering the failings of the Roman legions and their carelessness and lack of foresight in dealing with a crafty adversary, it's worthing noting that there are clues about Spartacus as a leader. He was only one of three commanders voted by the escapees. Both Crixus and Oenomaus, the other two, argued with Spartacus and split away with their own followers and were defeated quite quickly. Further, Sallust reveals that Spartacus was unable to stop his men from raping and killing in the places he plundered. Indeed, he specifically describes him as 'powerless'. The followers of Spartacus and Crixus were not from the same country as their leaders, nor were they of the same nation, and only their common lot and their fate drew them together for the campaign. And this is only natural. For I believe every slave to be the enemy of his master when it appears possible to overpower him Synesius (5th Century) It is true the Romans had an uncomfortable relationship with their slaves, one bounded by practises designed to dissuade them from revolt. Such was the folk memory of Spartacus that it was considered necessary. If however, we accept that Spartacus was intent on military conquest of the Roman state and the elinination of slavery, what did Karl Marx's hero achieve? Nothing.

Why? Because it suits your sensibilities? You're using the phrase as a label and thus risking using the quote out of context. Vegetius after all wasn't a military man nor was his work an accurate commentary on legionary activity.

Not disputed at all. However, what is important is that the Romans saw associations about these fights, religious sigificance sometimes, that we don't see in modern hindsight. It does sound a bit hypocritical considering how much money was involved in the genre, but there you go. Anyhow, my point is that a femal venator represented Diane, Goddess of the Hunt, and I really can't see the Romans ignoring or passing scorn on such a re-enactment. On the other hand, Bestarii, since they actually fought animals close up and dirty as it were, were guilty by association of being en par with animals, whereas the venators displayed Roman mastery over nature by 'hunting' the animals at a distance using bows and spears (or whatever else - you may know more about that). This question makes it clear that you have not read my article in which I summarize e.g. the article by Stephen Brunet in which he points out that it is a misinterpretation that women faught against dwarfs. Before I repeat here my article I strongly recommend you to check out the link given by Viggen in the first post of this thread, there you will find the answer. Fair enough, although I did mean the comedy aspect. It wasn't a 'fight' in the same way as professional bouts at all. The reason I mentioned that was the hope you would react in a certain way (I nearly achieved that - thanks for the reference anyway ). You see, professional fighters such as existed from the Principate onward must have had a great deal of pride in what they did - there is of course the mention that "Gladiators love nothing more than to provide pleasure to their owners" by fighting well and in an entertaining manner. I was wondering if any of that attitude had worn off onto you. The difference of course is that you're not owned by anyone ( I hope not anyway!) which provides a difference before we begin the comparison of mindset, and that you perform for public display as opposed to actually fighting to the death. In one respect you have something very much in common with those arena contestants two thousand years ago - you are performing these mock fights for public entertainment. It's very easy to get wrapped up in the violent aspects of this, and to my eyes at least, hugely disturbing that people would flock to watch two individuals fight for real, but the thrill of watching a sword fight taking place must have have been palpable and the entire reason for gladiatorial popularity. I wonder - how does the modern audience react to your displays?

There's a romantic element to Spartacus that some people seem remarkably unwilling to dispense with. Firstly, the 'battles' and 'consistently crushing victories'. Spartacus outwitted the enemy commanders often enough and did fight off the legions from time to time, but the word 'battle' here is misleading. In the context of romanticism it conjures up an image of ranks of soldiers lining up against each other and a tactical chessboard confrontation ensuing. Battles of this nature are common enough in the ancient world but care needs to be taken. The parade ground formations of the flintlock era are inappropriate, and even the Roman legions with all their much vaunted organisation tended to employ simplistic formations due to the relative lack of sophisticated communication and the manner in which ancient battles were fought. It's wrong to assume that generals of that time always stood behind the lines directing efforts. Often the commanders were in the thick of battle, trying to rally or exort their men directly. Instead, the tactics to be used against the enemy were more usually decided the night before. Further, the word 'battle' may be misconstrued. To Roman eyes, that simply meant a confrontation with lots of armed men. It didn't necessarily mean a text book set piece battle as we understand the term, and given the level of chicanery used by generals in ancient times it's remarkable how many ancient armies were overcome by a simple ruse, not just Roman ones either. Noticeably, the battles Spartacus fought were forced upon him. He did not seek out confrontations with the legions. He did not attempt to 'defeat' Rome, and indeed, was more content to thumb his nose at it. He did not attempt to conquer territory and establish zones of control, rather he did no more than intrude upon the Roman. In all cases, his motivation was top ensure he could leave the area safely and pursue his aim of plundering the neighbourhood. In what way was his strategy military? Not at all, because he had none. His 'battles' were fought merely to stay at large. As to the question of whether Spartacus would be allowed to escape north over the Alps, one should remember by that time he was an established bandit. Once encamped on the sklopes of Vesuvius (not the crater - that wasn't there at the time) he was raiding the local area repeatedly, a lifestyle he had already once become accustomed to. Had he simply escaped north, then I doubt the Romans would have worried too much about him and a hundred gladiators (although they would have been escaped slaves from that point on). However, he was actively employed in brigandage and that changed everything. So I agree, even if he had escaped to the north, the Romans wouldn't have forgotten him. That said, he didn't. He turned south and remained a bandit at large, plundering towns and cities and making good use of the numbers of followers attracted by his rebellious attitude. Even in his own day, he must have seemed a romantic figure. Despite the repeated assurances on this thread that Spartacus was indeed a general, it's useful to compare him to Tacfarinas, a similar figure althoiugh one more obscure. Tacfarinas of course was in Africa, not the Italian mainland, thus his threat seemed far away. In any event, he fought three campaigns against the Romans and was only defeated on the third. The important point was that despite training his forces to fight in the Roman model and successfully conducting more identifiably military campaigns, he was never described as a general. Not once. The question of where the recruits Spartacus gathered had come from is nio great mystery. The economic situation of the time involved considerable hardship, and it it's known that the huge numbers of slaves were not well treated in this period. In fact, with the slave revolts in Sicily very much in mind, is it any wonder Spartacus attempted to reach that island? To him, it was a ready source of recruits and potential safe haven. In effect, Spartacus gathered recruits for the same reasons that other more modern revolts have become popular. They saw in him a hope of something better. Although Spartacus had no intention of the marxist inspired ideal of freeing the downtrodden masses, it did provide him with both men that could be employed defensively and also too considerable baggage that must have slowed him him down.

I take issue on this point. Bestiarii were 'beast fighters' and as such considered the lowest of the low of the gladiatorial kind (ignoring the Noxii but as intended victims they were never trained). Venatorii were 'beast hunters', athletes who didn't fight animals per se but attacked from a distance (though inevitably there must have been times when it all went horribly wrong for them). It is interesting though that you dismiss animal fighters as non-gladiators. Strictly speaking that's the case and I suspect the Romans had views along those lines, since an animal hunt (of whatever variety) was an added spectacle and not part of the formal one-on-one professional bouts. Incidentially (and this is a little crass), do you re-enact the comedy bouts with dwarf males? That was common entertainment before and during the period of female gladiatorial matches.

The problem is one of perception. The image of Spartacus as a general is very enticing but one that gives him air and graces he never had. Spartacus after all had no overall strategy other than to plunder and stay one step ahead of the Romans, nor was he attempting to win 'victory' or 'conquest' over the Roman state. Nor for that matter did he have any formal army whatsoever, rather a band of escaped gladiators (although most of these were no more than ill-trained cannon-fodder anyway - there was a spectacle planned in Capua and Spartacus armed his followers with weapons intended for the performance, found on a wagon approaching outside ot town) and an increasingly large retinue of disaffected individuals. Spartacus may have had military credentials though. One story describes him as a deserter from the auxillaries, which is in keeping with the nature of the man. His main claim to fame is that he stayed at large for so long and embarrased Roman generals by outwitting them. That in itself doesn't make him a general, and that's why I prefer to describe him as a guerilla leader. His campaign was based on banditry, not miltary conquest of territory or other strategic objectives. In fact, there's a strong possibility that he thought he could get away weith his bandit lifestyle. Although he'd been caught and sentenced once already, his ability to outwit the legions sent against him persuaded him (or if not, most of his followers) to turn south and begin plundering instead of making for the Alps and freedom 'over the border'. He was therefore conducting his campaign for personal gain - though I must also point out that he was described as being scrupulously fair in dividing the spoils. Notice also that in the Kirk Douglas film there's a scene where Spartacus stops a fight hastily arranged between senators, with Spartacus demanding to know whether they had become animals (humanity is a theme visited by the film regularly), when in fact the historical Spartacus was only too ken to see his social betters fight each other as they had intended him to.

Over the years I've met people on internet forums. We all say that. The truth is we haven't met them at all. They're just little icons and text messages from people far far away. How well can you know someone on a website? That's difficult to say. If there's one thing the internet allows, and indeed one of it's greatest dangers, is the anonymity of it. You can invent a persona and people do exactly that. Time and again I hear stories of 'women' being unmasked as male teenagers (Good grief, the world is full of wannabe transvestites!) or the cute friendly boy your daugter chatted to via the web turns out to be a middle aged paedophile who wants an adventure away from home. You can never be fully certain who you're communicating with. This has been brought into focus again by the Roman Catholic Church, something I find coldly amusing considering the numbers of dodgy individuals that organised religion hides in its ranks, but there you go. Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster has warned that networking sites such as Facebook and Myspace are encouraging teenagers to create 'transient' friendships. It could leave them traumatised or suicidal he says. I think that's a little off the mark. You see, most relationships are transient. How many people do you meet find long lasting relationships or friendships with you? Precious few. That's simply how life is. The problem then isn't the site, but the learning experience of a teenager who puts too much trust in someone they've never met. Teenagers usually want friendships and to be honest they make the same mistakes dealing with people face to face. Or does the ranks of unmarried teenage mothers mean nothing? The fault isn't the internet, but the lack of guidance for young people in learning about life and how dangerous or disappointing it can be. So, Mr Nichols, why not try doing something positive instead of finding a scapegoat? You are in the business of guidance, are you not? Or is the internet too difficult to burn? Job Offer of the Week A few weeks ago I looked up a business address on the internet and sent a CV on the off chance thy might have a suitable vacancy, or perhaps keep my details on file for future consideration. Standard job searching practice really. Usually you don't hear any more, but this company very kindly responded. They apologised that they didn't have anything to offer me in their sales office in Swindon, Wiltshire, southern England, but their manufacturing facility is in Aberdeen Scotland and would I like my details forwarded? Not really. Bit far to walk every day.

...Caligula, the grandson of Drusus, the step-son of Augustus, and grand-nephew of Tiberius himself, a most wicked and cruel prince, who effaced even the memory of Tiberius's enormities. He undertook a war against the Germans; but, after entering Suevia, made no effort to do anything. He committed incest with his sisters, and acknowledged a daughter that he had by one of them. While tyrannizing over all with the utmost avarice, licentiousness, and cruelty, he was assassinated in the palace... Historiae Romanae Breviarium (Eutropius) Thus Gaius, after doing in three years, nine months, and twenty-eight days all that has been related, learned by actual experience that he was not a god. Roman History Book 59 (Cassius Dio)

Human beings are creatures of habit. We soon find a comfortable routine in any enviroment, finding a way of life that suits us just fine. Why then do we worry so much about lifestyles? Everyone likes to suggest how we ought to live. Religion has been doing that for thousands of years of course. It's no coincidence that churches and temples demand attendance and regular prayer. The government very kindly makes lots of rules to persuade us to adopt their own sanitised version of behaviour. Not only that, they give us lots of forms to fill in, so they can check. Some might be quite happy to have their lives ordered and regulated by someone else, to avoid the stress of choice and concious thought. On the other hand there's always a few of us who are unwilling to be constrained by conformity. Somewhere in the middle are the majority who want to do the right thing but aren't entirely happy about the restrictions that authority places upon us. Why else are foreign holidays so popular? The media provides us with a sort of escape valve. People can sit in front of television and watch other peoples lives, real or imagined, and the enduring popularity of soap operas is that endemic quality of human society, poking your nose into someone elses business. Clearly then lifestyles are an outward sign of wealth and status, a marker by which judge ourselves and others. Choosing a lifestylwe is a little difficult though if it doesn't come naturally to you. Choose the wrong one, and you can be seen as arrogant, haughty, a poser, or simply a buffoon. Obviously we need help to choose, and luckily for western society the racks of lifestyle magazines offer endless coaching on what is or isn't stylish. I noticed one such magazine yesterday. A glossy colour photo on the cover of a happy smiling woman, pleased with life, content with all that she has, and a very subliminal advert for the advice contained within its pages. There was a list of articles on the frnt cover. I wonder... How hard can it be to do the same thing? How to avoid Swine Flu As I understand it, swine flu is passed from person to person. So the best advice is to stop meeting people. Stay at home. Now that's a little boring I know so perhaps you'd consider taking up a hobby? How to trace your family tree Perfect. Spend your time investigating your family tree and discover which of your ancestors died of swine flu. Now whilst this might be fun at first, you will no doubt quickly discover your social life is suffering. Fear not. We have the advice to help you... How to find new friends Now this is a subject of perennial interest to human beings because so many of us are rubbish at finding new friends. One lady of my acquaintence suggested that you should 'love yourself before others love you'. Aha. Well I'm not entirely sure that's going to work in polite society, so perhaps a holiday might do the trick? How to cut costs on foreign holidays Don't go. That's a few hundred pounds saved straight away. Now you can get drunk for four weeks instead of two. How about that for advice? Lifestyle of the Week Also on the cover was Carol Vordeman, proclaiming 'I've found my passion again'. Good for you dear. But unless you're planning to release keep fit videos with pornographic content, I really don't see why I should be bothered. Perhaps my own existence is rewarding enough in it's modest way to keep me happy. It seems though that these magazines exist to fulfill a basic fantasy to many miserable and disappointed people. Personally, I think these people should stop buying magazines and starting finding passions of their own. They'll be much happier than wishing they could emulate other peoples. And they'll have more money to spend. Go on. Cheer yourself up. Get right down to the mall and shop 'til you drop. If you're still sat here reading this instead of rushing out the door with plastic bags and chequebook at the ready, congratulations, you passed the final exam.

It's known at least one woman was trained as a venator, an animal hunter. As for bestiarii (animal fighters) it's unlikely the Romans would be so crass and unchivalrous to have a woman brawl with a wild animal without some element of moral justice involved. There is also a stone relief that shows two female gladiators (one named Amazonia) dressed in conventional gladiatorial gear which indicates they fought in familiar pairings as was the convention. What didn't happen was for men and women to fight each other - that was considered unfair. I should add as an afterthought that I've come across no reference whatsoever to women riding horses in the arena.

Occaisionally I get stray phone messages. I suppose we all do from tiime to time, and there was a time you always got double glazing companies trying to sell you more replacement windows. Sometimes you get strange characters phoning for strange reasons. I remember one chap called me and I made the mistake of assuming it one of my mates (he used the same name). He then proceeded to ask where his hammer was. Hammer? What hammer? He then got irate because I'd 'lost' his hammer. Sorry mate, wrong number. *click* On the other hand, stray calls can be of a personal nature, like the young lady who valiantly tried to get a date by telling me I'd met her at a party. Which party? I'd remember. No, I didn't think she could tell me when and where it was, something I find a little strange considering she was so keen to go out with me. Call me suspicious, but instinct tells me to be wary of this sort of thing. The reason I discuss this subject is that I've received a phone message from a 'workman' who identified himself by his first name (as if that meant anything to me) claiming he needed access to my home to check for water leaks. His Liverpool accent didn't nothing to assuage my doubts. "Call me on this number" the message ended. Except it comes up as a '(No Number)' entry. That's happened before. Back when my outrageously lowered and body kitted Eunos Cabriolet still worked, I'd parked it in a well to do area at the suggestion of the Police and got a phone call from a citizen who was breathlessly keen to get me to drive it somewhere else. "I've scratched the paint on my car trying to get around it into my drive" She claimed. As it happened, I did move the car half an hour later, but she was mysteriously absent when I did. Something didn't quite sound right that day, and today, I got the same feeling. But I'll check with the letting agent anyway and find out whether they know who this 'workman' is. Just in case my neighbours are drowning. Pic of the Day Yes, I was out and about yesterday. Heavy showers and hot sunshine. A very average hiking experience then, and no strange phone calls to disturb the rural isolation. A pair of hawks circled the woods to the right of the picture. Large ones, making shrill cries. Aaah... Young love.... Phone Call of the Week There's a telephone facility for jobseekers that I sometimes use. You sort of get to know the various characters employed by the call centre, and only one of them sounds like they live in Delhi. Unfortunately one of them is not entirely interested in his job. He rushes through the requisite phrases in a bored 'Oh gawd not another caller' voice and when he locates a vacancy for you, he reads through the description so fast you get the impression he doesn't care whether you write any of that stuff down or not. Sorry, what was that email address again? Could you spell that please? Sorry, was that 'm' or 'n'? Sorry I called.

The republic didn't return because the senators who wanted it to didn't try hard enough. They did, if I remember right, make a lot of noise on the subject. The praetorians however had found someone to carry on the role of emperor and that suited them just fine, since if the republic was reinstated it was back to the regular legions for the lot of them with the loss of all perks. Having been caught out by events, the senators had no reliable military force to face down the praetorians.

Yesterday afternoon I braved the rain and popped down to the supermarket for my weekly needs. There's a magazine rack near the door from the central concourse and to be honest, I've long given up any interest in it. Basically the magazines on sale either tell you what's happening in the private lives of celebrities, what they're wearing this year, or how men can have a flat six-pack stomach like theirs. This time though I noticed a copy of Mojo, an indie music publication intended for people who understand the secret language of music journalism. Quite frankly I've got little time for discerning the meaning of life from magazines and I can't say music journalists have ever impressed me with enlightenment about the human condition (or even last nights gig), but then I saw the free CD attached to the cover. Africa Rising it was called. A collection of various artists and their ethnic music. For some reason this intrigued me. Quite why I don't know. Africa has never loomed large in my conciousness and ethnic music doesn't rouse me. I admit I liked the Giant Leap album, the one with Robbie Williams on it, and also No Quarter (Robert Plant & Jimmy Page) which contained ethnic versions of Led Zeppelin tracks. The genre is full of rythmn with a sort of warm chaos to it, a bit like primitive jazz. Am I developing a taste for African music? Good grief, all my dead heavy metal heroes must be turning in their grave. All I can say is that Africa Rising doesn't disappoint. Compliment of the Week The lady on the checkout till described me as a young man. Isn't it amazing what a copy of Mojo does for your public image? Who needs a flat six-pack stomach anyway?

Killing fields? Not quite on that scale. More like a summary execution of a local warrior band. That sort of thing has always occured in warfare.

I had thought that today I would venture out into the wilderness yet again, pack on back, braving life and limb in the Rainforests of Darkest Wiltshire. If you intend a journey out of doors it's always wise to consult the weather reports and make an informed decision on whether the trip is worth the trouble. I know that sounds extrene - it is only the grassy downlands of North Wiltshire and that's fairly local to where I live - but all the same it's suprising how harsh conditions can get up there and I'd rather not get caught out. As it happens, my plans were dashed by a weatherman who clearly knew I what I was up to. He smiled joyfully as he warned of the huge band of rain due to cross England today. Light rain or showers I can cope with well enough, but having to trudge miles through heavy rain? Discretion is the better part of valour. Now some of you might be saying "Not exactly Sir Ranulph Fiennes is he?" No, I'm not. Neither are you in all likeliehood. There again, people like that are driven to push the boundaries of human endurance and so forth, whereas I go hiking for fun, fresh air, and what remains of my personal fitness. Thing is though, whereas the risk and significance of my wanderings are so much less than famous polar explorers, in a sense I am doing it for the same reasons. I do want to push my physical limits (a little bit anyway) and I do want to come home believing I've traversed the wilderness, such as is available in modern Britain on my doorstep. What I don't want to do though is overtly risk my health and safety to the same degree, and that's really what marks out the difference. Life is all about risk isn't it? Do you drive a pillow-protected city car on regulated roads at legal speeds or a full on grand prix car with a carbon fibre crash cell and only a plastic helmet to ward off debris on the track as you steam forward at nearly two hundred miles an hour? Do you go home tonight to faithful Muriel and the kids, or try it on with that blonde secretary in a mad hormone driven rush to obey basic instincts? Ultimately it's your own choice of course. Each of us has a personal limit to the amount of risk we accept into our lives, and often that goes hand in hand with your confidence. Truth be told, going onto the downs during a downpour isn't really that risky (I did go up there once during a blizzard - Fiennes fans please note), but ye gods what a miserable way to spend the day. In any case, I have another health reason not to disappear into the wilderness today... Heathy Eating of the Week I blame tv adverts. No, I do. They keep on showing happy smiling people enjoying life to the full and looking so healthy you grit your teeth at the sight of it. So passing the cereal shelf at the supermarket I stopped at the boxes marked "Fibrewheat Brownflakes" Shall I? Shan't I? Oh what the heck, lets do my health a favour... Sixty nine pence for a box of cereal can't be bad... In the early hours of this morning, I discovered how healthy my bowels had become. Three times I've made a desperate dash for the loo and... Oh no... not again! If you'll excuse me, I'm going to log off now....

The extra day off is welcome (though at the moment it makes little difference to me). What isn't welcome are the associations the government want to apply to it. I doubt they have our leisure at heart.

I see from the news that there's plans to create a new bank holiday. Another one? hey I don't mind at all, it's another day of work... Or it would be if I had a job. It does seem a bit strange though. For a government trying so hard to oil the wheels of transport policy, why do they want to clog up the motorways with parked cars again? Is it merely another example of the Labour Party attempting to buy favour with a disillusioned public? Vote for us and have new holidays? Given that this government taxes us more than ever before, that they've borrowed so much money the economy will be weighed down for decades, that they confidently predict a recovery next year in a worsening economy, why do they think another bank holiday is such a good idea? Then it hits you. They want this new day off to commemorate those who have died at work. I have to say this is a shocking piece of political cynicism. Given that pension schemes are collapsing and most of us will have to work into retirement age and collapse on the job, one wonders if this new holiday isn't designed to prepare us for the ranks of body bags being collected from the factory gates. Welcome to Labours brave new world. Now Thats What I Call Dire For many years now there have been music compilations released with tv adverts, collections of chart hits that were probably best left forgotten in the first place. The Now Thats What I Call Music series is currently up to album 73. Not to be outdone, my old school has begun making CD's of teachers, parents, students, past, present, and future recording music of one sort or another, calling iit Now That's What I Call Commonweal in a blatant bandwagon of marketing. Heck, I'm glad I got out of there when I did.

I've just read through an archaeological report about Stonehenge dating back to 1901. Apparently some of the stones fell over the year before due to neglect and the idea was to set them upright again and have a dig around. I was impressed by the dry analytical research they did, with little of the victorian theorising that's so mindnumbingly ridiculous. One point of interest though. They found a roman coin there, a 'sestercius of Antonia', which was a coin of the Claudian period. Coincidence? Or did Roman soldiers pop down there to take a look? Stonehenge may have declined in importance during the iron age but it was used as a temple by druidic priests, so perhaps a leftover of an eviction by Vespasians conquerors? It would be fascinating to find out.

Not an especially nice morning. Damp and dreary, another Monday, and despite the elation of getting my PC going - or more accurately, going when it can be bothered - today just doesn't have that 'Get Up And Go' feel about it. Of course my Uncle, now sadly deceased, would have said I wasn't a 'Get Up And Go' person. I think he was wrong there, but I have to confess his determination to find a job when he got made redundant was the stuff of personal heroism. So I must concede his point and call myself a 'Get Up And Think About It' person. Maybe something in the letterbox will cheer me up? You never know... The Great Bank Statement Affair A letter from the bank I see. You can tell because they have a particular franking mark on their envelopes. What will that be about? A brand new account you have to pay for? Insurance offers? Nope, it's a bank statement. Pages of it this time. Okay, lets check through it and... Hang on... Where's my benefits payments for the last fortnight?... Have they stopped my benefits without telling me? After all the stuff I did at the Programme Centre? I snarled with rage and rolled up my sleeves. I was not going to be treated like this! The Job Centre was shut. Lucky for you lot. So instead I burst upon the Council reception centre and proceeded to explain my sorry circumstance. "Oh. Well, we don't have anyone here who can deal with this." Said the bemused woman behind the desk. My face was reaching the darker shade of red by this time, so she advised me a telephone was available down the hall. I stomped down there and having found the phone, discovered the frustrating fact that Swindon Council have not yet developed the technology to make them work. "Calm down!" A young woman interrupted me, worried my skin was going green and my shirt failing to contain swelling muscles (not to mention the risk of inadvertant damage to a disfunctional telephone). I think I might have lost my temper at that moment slightly. Embarrasement of the Week Having eventually found someone to talk to who understood what benefits were and had the authority to answer my frantic queries, I realised the bank statement sheets were in the wrong order. I had indeed been paid my benefits. If anyone I savaged and tore limb from limb is reading this, then I apologise for getting a tad upset. Popular opinion to the contrary, I am a klutz.

You took the analogy further than I intended. What I was pointing at was a vivid example of willingness to slaughter civilians, not the specific example of the holocaust. I agree with the expedience element - I mentioned that as well. However, what must be underlined is the commercial element of this. The Romans themselves referred to the 'Wages of War', meaning the ability of armies to operate at a profit by looting and enslaving. That's something the modern world can't emulate with its rules of engagements and expensive hardware. In other words, not only were the Romans brutal, but they deliberately profitted from that brutality, which is why we see them them in such a disagreeable light. The best example is an event described by Wikipedia as follows... Since 193 BCE, the Lusitanians had been fighting the Romans. In 150 BCE, they were defeated by Praetor Servius Galba: springing a clever trap, he killed 9,000 Lusitanians and later sold 20,000 more as slaves in Gaul (modern France). What Servius Galba did was offer a cessation of hostilities to the Lusitanii and told them that if they surrendered their weapons at any of three camps, they could live peacefully as Roman allies with their own land and no hard feelings. Galba was of course lying, and immediately the weapons were surrendered he slaughtered the hapless barbarians and profitted mightily from selling the rest in Rome. In fact, the Senate was outraged by this example of immoral behaviour and had Galba prosecuted. The wily ex-general had his young children brought into the senate house crying their eyes out because they'd been told daddy was to be executed. The senators couldn't bear to see children so upset and so let Galba off. Now Galba was of course somewhat less than honourable compared to many of his time - that's obvious from the senatorial reaction to his trap - but as a counterpoint its worth noting what happened at Jerusalem in AD70, when the Romans assaulted the city. A huge slaughter took place but after so much killing, even the hardened legionaries were sick of it, and began capturing the jews as prisoners instead. One estimate puts the number taken away as slaves, either as labourers to Egypt, or as unforunates sold to provincial arenas, as 97,000.

The lightning revealed the outline of the brick terrace house in Swindon's Old Town. There, perched on the side of a hill, a terrible scientific experiment was about to take place. In the beige dungeons of of the house, beneath the slanting archways, Doktor Kaldrailstein made the last few adjustments to his work. Soon he would pull the industrial strength lever that allowed the electricity to flow, and breathe life into his creation. The terrible hybrid creature, made from the parts of deceased computers, lay inert on the floor. Oh hang on, I need to plug this cable in too. Ahhh, that's better. I, Doktor Kaldrailstein, will now make this computer live!.... *click* Live! Live ! Mwuahahahaaaaaa!... Oh go on, please... hang on... The screen is changing. My computer is alive!... Oh, it's all frozen up. I'll just thump it on the side here, wake it up a little.... Yes! Kaldrailsteins Monster is booting up! They all said I was mad, that it couldn't be done, but I have proved myself correct. Errr... Hang on.... This all going wrong.... No... No.... Stay back.... What have I unleashed upon the world? Good News Of the Week My PC is running. Not entirely eagerly it must be said, but I can get it going. Just thought you'd like to know before crowds of irate Swindoners chase me through the night with torches and pitchforks in indignation at my repair job.