caldrail

They were two different class of entities. The Romans did not have a national army. They wouldn't dare give that much military power to one man (other than the emperor himself) for fear of coup detat. Instead, they developed the idea of temporary warbands which Marius had made permanent in his reforms, and given a regimental air by Augustus in his, yet its still erronous to see the legions (or auxillary formations for that matter) as regiments in an army. They were independent units, mini-armies in their own right, so that an ambitious general had a limiting factor in loyal legions against him. Auxillaries are to all intents and purposes foreign mercenaries serving under the Roman system in return for citizenship after they complete their term. Second class soldiers in other words, although valuable ones. A third tier was the rare occurence of slave soldiers. Augustus for instance had made freedmen of slaves in order to recruit them as sioldiers. They were not allowed regular weapons and equipment, nor were they allowed to billet beside legionaries.

There's a very cold wind blowing through the trees of Rushey Platt. Cold air from Russia has blown in and already the weather reports are warning of severe conditions. The AA have advised motorists to take warm clothing with them as gale force winds and drifts of heavy snow are expected. The reverse is going on in Australia right now, where winds from the continents interior are blowing hot air over the coastal regions where everybody lives. There's going to be comment about Global Warming of course. People will say carbon dioxide is to blame and that cars must be banned to stop these freak weather conditions from happening. But then, I had to give up driving last yearand now the weather has gotten worse? Obviously the sports car is not the villain we think it is. We like the weather to be predictable, not this mobile disaster area sweeping across the land. It seems people are only happy when life is the same from day to day. They like the monotony, the familiarity of the same old pattern, the certainty of the same old things. Not me. I like some variation. So today... lets see... what can I do today?.... oh stuff it, I'm off down the library. The Tale of the Library Whistler Once upon a time, in a library far far away, there was a person who made just a little bit too much noise. The Wicked Witch of the Library turned him in into a newt, and all the public at the library remained silent and happy. All was quiet until yesterday, when a young man, rash and headstrong, decided he would whistle as he browsed the internet. The Wicked Witch had long since retired, so the young man thought himself safe. The security guards were roused from their slumber. They talked into their radios then shrugged. So eventually a policeman came and took the young man away. Times have certainly changed. I blame the wind. Luckily Mr Policeman stopped the young man before he broke his.

Its more to do with long term trends in Roman society. In the early days, Romans were very public spirited and keen to do their bit - it was seen as a mark of respect to have served, and some senators tore open their togas to reveal war wounds to give their arguments weight during debates. But this was an era of austerity. As the more comfortable life evolved along with the empire (and although not everyone was rich and comfortable, there was an easier life to be had from servicing the needs of the wealthy) people were less interested in military life, especially after the success of the conquest era and the lack of further glory. By the late empire, military service wa considered onerous, and press gangs were used to find recruits, and whilst the practice of cutting off your thumb to avoid military service had been present in Roman society for hundreds of years, it got so frequent in the late empire that one emperor ruled that two thumbless men were as good as one fully fit man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_usurpers Plus a link to a list of them at the bottom.

Suetonius (Lives of the Caesars) mentions a few usurpers (however unlikely some of them were) Tacitus (Annals, Histories) discusses a legionary rebellion in Germania and also covers the events of AD69 - Year of Four Emperors Ammianus Marcellinus (Res Gestae discusses intrigue behind the events of the late empire Those are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there are others. Cassius Dio probably has something to say but I'm not well acquainted with his work.

I got the good news last night. The International Monetary Fund have suggested that Britain might be in recession for as much as twenty years, struggling to pay off debts while the rest of the west recover nicely thank you. Twenty years? You mean I'm going to bleat on about the economy and my lack of good fortune for two more decades? Should I cancel the Ferrari then? Now That I Come To Think Of It Until a few years ago, life was simple. I had money in my pocket and a slightly fast car on the drive. Now I'm a pedestrian. My last boss wanted me to drive BMW's. I suspect that was part of the reason for getting laid off. My boss previous to that wanted me to drive Vauxhall Vectra's. I'm almost convinced that was one reason why they let me go. The Police aren't happy about my driving hot Eunos Cabriolets either, but they let me go. My mother wants me to drive a cheap, economical, safe Toyota Prius. Only she's not letting go. "We went to Evesham yesterday.. In the car..." She told me over the phone. Yeah, whatever. Can't think of any reason to go to Evesham, can't understand why I need to take several more hours to do the journey than I used to, and I certainly don't want to be seen driving in a Prius. "Did you apply for that job?... Do you need a car for that job?...". Ahh no thats ok. Good grief, she'll have me wearing womans clothes in public next. As a Genuine Retired Has-Been Wannabee Rock Star who used to strut in skin tight zebra-striped lycra's with hair down to my waist, I have my standards. The Prius ain't one of them. Now I imagine there's a few people out there shaking their heads saying it's only a matter of time. I have to, because my blog isn't a world best-seller. So if there's anyone still out there who's patient enough to put up with my tales of doom and gloom, rest assured I'm still buying the occaisonal car magazine. Now that I come to think of it, I buy the occaisional train magazine too. Hey, Rod Stewart has a model railway doesn't he? Thing is, at the shop where I buy them, the train magazines have migrated to the top shelf along with the porno monthlies. One copy of Steamy Nights, and... yes, I'll take a copy of Railroad Dreams... Oh, and the latest issue of Railroad Model Photographer... They're doing an article on chain coupling. Unmissable.

Looks like he's taken a few punches....

"Trust Sicknote to get in the way... Should have stayed in bed..." Muttered AM as he shuffled past on his crutches. Was that comment directed at me? AM doesn't like me very much. Back in the days when the library was at its temporary hut, he had his favourite PC and used to bully people off it when he came in. He tried that with me once... "Come on, Mate, didn't you see my name on the screen?" No, I didn't, because it wasn't there and I couldn't have logged on if it was. And then I had to repeat the argument when two well-intentioned librarians had been recruited by the man to kick me off. Now of course the library is busier, and he can't push people off PC's like he used to. But Sicknote? For those unacquainted with British Commonwealth culture, thats a nickname applied to those who avoid onerous duty (or any duty at all) by pretending ill health when they're clearly fighting fit. Is AM suggesting that as an unemployed person I'm also claiming extra benefits for ill-health when I don't deserve it? Thats what a lot of people on the dole do, but not me. I'm miffed. Especially since AM clearly used to be the sort of soldier who shirked duty in his youth and was mouthy enough to get away with it. That smirk you see on his face when he succeeds in pulling the wool over peoples eyes is a little obvious. They say old soldiers never die. They're not wrong. Don't You Just Love Wildlife? I went to bed late last night, and settled in for a good snooze. Almost immediately an urban fox somewhere out the back started yelping. It made aconsiderable racket and it simply wouldn't stop. Please Mr Landlord, can I buy an air rifle? That way I shut the thing up. And whilst I'm at it, maybe those late night drunks proclaiming football team affiliation and advertising their manliness. Perhaps not. I doubt the Police would let me out of doors again. Go on then Mr Fox, yelp away.... Don't care... zzzzzzz Drama of the Week Drama and excitement right under my own nose. A gas appliance being fitted to a property up the road caught fire. Fire engines rushed to put out the blaze, Police blocked off the road. And I was blissfully unaware as I whiled away the hours tapping on my PC keyboard at home. I need to get out more. Assuming the Police let me that is.

:D

To give cavalry longer reach from horseback. We know that Not in doubt at all. But the point here is that the use of a longer blade as a slashing weapon necessitated a looser battle formation. Whilst the 'stabbing' element of the earlier gladius is 'emphasised', it must be pointed out that this is the natural result of close-order and disciplined formation of troops with large rectangular shields. They couldn't easily swing swords because they didn't have the space to do so. The change toward longer blades might also be described as a reaction to the increasing frequency of cavalry in their enemiies, but the wide scale adoption of longer blades coincides with the decline in standards following Constantines civil wars and those alluded to by Vegetius and Zosimus. Since the Roman recruits from barbarian cultures were inevitably more accustomed to longer blades anyway, it made sense to simply allow them to use similar weapons given that training wasn't adhered to as strongly as it once was. That barbarians adopted Roman weapons isn't so suprising. Swords are expensive items and if they happened to acquire Roman blades, somebody is going to use them. However, the length of barbarian blades by and large doesn't change much during the Roman period and thus the length of native weapons is more dependent on custom and technique than Roman influence. It reflects the change in Roman military operation. The days of large set-piece battles had gone. Sebastian pleaded with Valens not to march on the Goths for instance, but to continue letting him raid them (with great success according to sources). The Roman military of the late empire was focusing on small scale actions, raids and skirmishes, which better suited the mindset and training of the average Roman soldier of the day, and clearly the Romans had pretty well lost their expertise in command and control of large formations by the late 4th Century (Sebastian was vindicated, as Valens found out the hard way). Therefore 'large' legions had become obselete anyway, and given the decline in CCC, smaller units made more sense. The trouble is we look at the Roman Army with modern hindsight. We see it as essentially similar to our own modern national armies - which is incorrect. Generals of the Roman Legions were not senior officers of a national army nor part of a formal command structure. They were leaders of their own mini-army. The legions were independent formations and whilst they conformed (usually) to military command from their Emperor or his chosen man, the legionary legate was essentially no different to a tribal warband leader. His men were loyal to him, not Rome, and the system relied on these generals remaining loyal to Rome which all to often they weren't. Look how often usurpers were chosen by their own men to be emperor as a result of their popularity with the soldiers. Since Rome was an intensely competitive state, the temptation to use that military capability for their own ends was always present, and the threat of retaliation from other legions was often the only counter to it. For the Romans, 'Might is Right'. Right from the beginning of the principate, emperors were suspicious of succesful generals, and for good reason.

Its the Chinese New Year, and since they haven't been inflicted deeply by the economic downturn, today they've been celebrating. It also happens to be Year of the Ox which is good news for me, because in Chinese astrology that's me - I'm an Ox. There you go, I've admitted it. Get Away From It All Australia are advertising for a guy to run Hamilton Island, a tropical paradise, in a deal involving free flights, feeding turtles, collecting mail, scuba swimming, running a Hamilton Island blog, watching whales, and modest pay. So whats the catch? The Tourist Authority say the succesful applicant will a zest for life. I nod knowingly. You'll be stuck miles from anywhere without anyone to talk to. A bit like Swindon then. Adverts of the Week I was watching late night tv and the inevitable adverts turned their attention to those feeling lonely and unloved on the weekend. Phone now and speak to lovely girls. Who knows where it will lead? Call me jaded, but I think I already know. The next advert stated categorically that I would be speaking to genuine girls. Phew. I thought the robots had taken over. Still, if I happen to get the job on Hanilton Island at least I'll have someone to talk to, assuming my mobile phone battery lasts that long.

They certainly knew about it by the Council of Nicaea in ad325. Curiously, for a book that is a call to arms against Rome, it was included as canon by the priests convened by the Roman Emperor Constantine to unify Christianity. It seems then the underlying message in the Book of Revelations had been misunderstood within three hundred years, or were the priests including it for subtle reasons? True, the Christians felt their time had come, and that Constantine was supporting their efforts, but he was still pagan at this time, a sun worshipper, and tried to have one of his relatives worshipped as Jesus. Were the Christians playing it both ways? Or simply like today, assuming the prophetic prose spoke of future events rather than a diatribe against Rome?

Wasn't there a piece of legislation, about this time, which prevented men of senatorial rank from assuming officerships in the army? I've forgotten exactly when it was passed, but i know it was mid to late 4th century. Possibly drawn up to prevent usurpation, it resulted in an army in which the Roman ruling classes now had no direct involvement. Not at Adrianople. The list of officers killed are clearly well connected, and for instance, Richomeres (who avoided the battle by agreeing to become a hostage of the Goths and was at the Roman camp collecting other agreed hostages when the battle started) had a noble title.

It was for a variety of reasons. Valens for instance asked for Sebastian to be a general of his armies (I believe they were related, and Sebastian had a good reputation working in the western military). Whilst Valens was busy wit some pressing matters and reforming an army to take on the Goths on his return to Constantinople, he got Sebastian to keep the Goths busy. Acccording to Zosimus, heads were arriving in the city every day, and Valens was well aware of how Sebastian was pressing him not to fight a set-piece battle against the Goths. Eventually Valens set forth with an army toward Adrianople, but was persuaded to let Sebastian force-march a contingent of the best troops as a reconnaisance in force, which resulted in a victory at the River Maritza - Sebastian made the mistake of glorifying the event. So Valens wanted a victory. he wanted to outdo Sebastian so as not to suffer the embarrasement and politcal threat, and he wanted to secure a victory without the help of Gratian, the western emperor, en route but delayed. So in this case it was all about image. this was the Dominate, a period of Roman history in which emperors were keen to put on shows of wealth and military success, and really only bred an atmosphere of intrigue.

The attack of Germanic tribes at Kalkriese took place over miles of dense temperate rainforest and was a co-ordinated attack, which indicates central planning and communication. Also, the plan was not simply to whittle the Romans down, but a successful attempt to lure the legions into a prepared killing ground. The attacks further back along the column were intended to disrupt the Roman column and prevent any retreat. The fact these tribesmen had co-operated at all suggests also that Arminius was a considerable leader. Certainly his demise took place because of the differences between tribes (though one can speculate about Roman intrigue). The weather did turn bad, but this was less of an physical factor, since the storm was deeply significant to superstitious Roman soldiers so it was their morale that was harmed. The legions of the time were no less disciplined that at any other - indeed, Arminius's plan hinged on the Romans behaving as expected. What civilians are you discussing? The legions were on campaign to stop what they'd been told was a revolt. They were marching to battle in other words.

As you might have guessed, I spent last night watching Monty Python's third film, The Meaning Of Life, definitely the least funny of the three, and perhaps proof that Life isn't fun? Certainly the town I live in has tried to tell us its a great place to live ever since the railworks, our very own dark satanic mill, closed for business. Yet Swindon always seems so meaningless. It does seem a little coincidental that I've chosen to discuss the Meaning of Life, especially since I seem to have so little of one these days. Or so it seems. Funny thing is, the people who pour scorn on me for not being popular really don't seem to have any more life than I do, nor are they actually popular beyond a few mates. It's as if they don't comprehend that the world exists beyond their own self importance, thus ignorance really is bliss. Of course lifes rich diversity is easier if you're rich too. They say money makes the world go round, though one wonders whether Sir Isaac Newton actually thought that the contents of his purse made apples fall on his head. I must now devote an entire paragraph to Jesus. The reason for this is that despite being offically described as the 'Worlds Most Caring Person', he poured scorn on rich people like a sort of ancient Jewish marxist. Since the Roman Emperor was one of the richest people around at the time, one can understand why they nailed Jesus up. It's a bit like Emperor Tiberius slapping the mans cheek shortly before telling him in a heavy Italian accent that he hadn't shown enough respect. The Romans of course believed money was everything. By strange coincidence, so do the people who are good at earning it. There seems to be this attitude amongst them that since they can afford to be more sophisticated, they are, and are therefore happy at being intrinsically superior to plebs. Just human nature I guess. But are they any different to plebs? Not really, since they always adopt the same lifestyles as their peers. Since I don't seem to be adopting the lifestyles of the Joneses, I must conclude the Meaning of Life isn't found in my bank statement. So where else? Some people see meaning in science, religion, sport, politics, fashion, popularity, gambling, violence, alcohol, drugs, art, music, literature, families, friendships, travel, hot sex, hot cars, railway engines, stamp collecting, fluffy animals, carbon footprints, inconveniently placed trees, or simply sounding important. I guess the Meaning of Life really boils down to the fact that you can choose.what it means to you. So make your mind up and be happy before someone else decides what you should do to make their life meaningful. New Low of the Week It had to happen. After nearly a year of trawling through job adverts and banging on doors, I finally succumbed to temptation and applied for a job of manual labour in a warehouse. Sigh... Now all I have to do is find a warehouse that's still open. Ouch, that sounded pessimistic. Unforgivable. Especially since I've just had a pay rise on my benefits. Excuse me while I check my bank statement.

I see. So what do you think was the high point of Joe Bidens term as President of the United States? What were his successes? Where did he fail? After all, Barack Obama replaced him as President within twelve minutes so he couldn't have been brilliant? Perhaps he didn't buy a barack-in-a-box?

Sejanus had risen to prominence beneath the senators socially and had considerable influence by beeing the confidant of Tiberius. The thing is though, Sejanus was using this influence to clear his path politically by removing those he regarded as obstacles. It stands to reason that some senators were outraged or frightened and thus began plotting, basically, to save their own skins by removing Sejanus. Tiberius was already unpopular anyway but then again he was Augustus's chosen successor. To say Tiberius was a victim doesn't really work for me. Even though he remained in Capri for two thirds of his reign he still remained Romes head man. Sejanus really had no-one to blame but himself. He lived by the execution warrant and died by it.

The structure of the Roman military during the Empire was simple. Individual generals (Legatii) were in command of legions which acted as independent mini-armies. There was no national army. For that reason, the Empire was absolutely dependent on the loyalty of these men and very often found them looking after their own political interests rather than than enforcing the security of provinces. Vercingetorix rose in rebellion after the Gauls were conquered, whilst anti-Roman sentiment was at its highest. You know what? I agree completely. However, the ability of the opposing troops and leaders must be considered.

Right. Time to sit down in my cubicle at the Library and while away an hour on the internet. It's quiet, nobodies showing off their bestial personal habits, and no mobuile phones... Uh-oh. I spoke too soon. The young black lady on the PC to me right whipped her phone out with practised ease. She spoke clearly, confidently, quietly, and for some strange reason, there was a very appealing tone to her voice. I found myself listening in. Oh no. I've turned into a sad eavesdropper. Oh well.. Now it seems that her friend has a relation who is getting into trouble with the police. That seems to be a rite of manhood with young black males all over world. It makes me wonder if their girlfriends get turned on by the bad boy image... "You've been arrested how many times?... Wow...." I don't get it. With all the modern equality and equal opportunities, not to mention a black President of the US, how can young black males claim to be repressed? They say White Attitudes. What White Attitudes? I used to hang around with a group of young blacks and found them affable company, even if they did try to live up to the L.A. image. None worked for a living of course, and it doesn't take much speculation to figure out how they paid for their designer clothes. I remember meeting a twenty-something black woman a year or two ago. Somehow or other we got talking and I have to confess, she was nice. Sadly my 'White Trash' label didn't impress her mother, who happened to be in the bar too, and the young lady promptly vanished from sight. It seems to me that racism, even in its mildest forms, persists because the blacks want it to. Its common ground for them, a focus of their community, an excuse, a cause to cling to, justifying every attempt they make to get something for nothing. Now there will be some people who'll accuse me of hypocrisy given my short-lived betrothal to Miss J. For those who haven't read my blog before (shame on you), Miss J was a black lady chosen by DS, a former boss of mine, a blonde airhead with the attention span of a goldfish and the marital instincts of a piranha. Given the circumstances, Miss J's skin tone was the least of my worries. So now we have a 44th Precedent of the United States. I would like to think he'll make a difference in more subtle ways than international politics. Somehow, I doubt things will change very much after the euphoria dies down. To many young blacks, it's business as usual. News Item of the Week Right, I've mentioned Barack Obama, I've done my duty. Now lets find the most interesting news item that doesn't have 'Inauguration' on it. Lets see... Parade on Pennsylvania Drive.... No. Bullet proof glass viewing compartment.... No Obama means 'He With Us' in Persian... No. Bible used has segregational connections... No Most people ever in a political meeting... No Newspapers describe crowd as 'Biblical'... No Steven Spielberg says he couldn't afford to film a scene with a crowd like this... No. Reaction of Iranians... No Kenyans hold celebration party.... No Oh I give up. Yes, it's Obama. But under protest, because the media aren't interested in anything else right now. Hang on... Whats this? RAF C130 scrambles to take pregnant woman from Stornaway Island to mainland hospital... Aha! Action, human interest, and a happy ending, all in one go. They almost got lost in the rush to cover Obama there. Well done lads.

Patterns of Urban Settlement In the light of recent threads concerning Roman urbanisation, here's a few thoughts on urban settlement in the the Roman world. Whilst this subject is interesting enough, and hauntingly familiar to us with modern perspective, it must be remembered that an estimated 80% of the population in Roman times were rural, and not all of those living as Romans. There are basically three types of Roman town. 1 - Existing settlements. In areas where the Romans made their presence known it was always possible to find larger settlements. With Roman patronage there would have been people in these settlements, not necessarily Roman, but those willing to conform and profit from the system, who would have built and sponsored Roman-style facilities alongside those of the native culture. Street layouts would broadly retain their former character although Roman planning would eventually impose itself to some degree during redevelopment. 2 - The Vicus Roman forts were either temproary marching camps, or more usefully, permanent installations built either of wood or stone. Once the Roman soldiers had become established in an area, they were a ready source of customers for local artisans and entrepeneurs. The importance of the Roman military in this respect cannot be overstated - entire local economies depended on soldiers money. Initially, these vicae were native settlements, built by those people who wanted to profit from the forts soldiers, and the existence of Roman facilities emerges to satisfy their requirements as customers. As the settlement becomes more successful, it would develop a Roman character. 3 - Colonies Towns created from scratch by urban planning were a feature of the principate, especially under the Augustan Franchise which saw the distribution and settlement of more than thirty legions of veteran soldiers. These colonies served two purposes - Firstly, they provided a nucleus of Roman culture in wilderness or declining regions. Secondly, they provided new markets and growth, therefore widening the tax base. Colonies were built to a generic pattern. They always had a north-south aligned street grid, and facilities would be found in more or less the same relationship to each other, a feature designed to make these towns familiar to travellers and enhance communications and community life. Urban Issues in the Roman World In all cases, the Romans encouraged the development of urban development and landmark changes might receive rewards and concessions to the community. A spirit of competition existed in the first stage of this urbanisation of the Roman World as communities vied with one another for prestige. The issue of 'Romanisation' is an exaggerated concept. Provincial populations for the most part carried on life as they always had done, apart from having to observe Roman law. Some provinces adapted to Roman culture readily and thus seem more 'Romanised' to our eyes. Britain was never fully compliant, the north of England in particular proving troublesome. Judaea and Mauretania were rebellious. Hadrians promise to rebuild Jerusalem turned to outright revolt when he decided to create a Roman city named Aelia Capitolina in its place. The familiarity of Roman architecture we see preserved around Europe, Africa, and th Middle East tends to reinforce the view that the Roman world was a unifrom culture, but that wasn't the case. Rome was a city state at the center of an empire, a confederation of barbarian regions under Roman rule. Some regions were more willing than others, and its worth noting that after the varian Disaster of AD9, the Romano-Germanic towns undergoing settlement beyond the Rhine were quickly abandoned by the native tribes. Urbanisation was therefore a product of Roman patronage, not culture, further encouraged by the presence of the Roman military and its need for logistical support. An interesting trend is the fortifying of towns from the 2nd Century AD. On the one hand, it can be seen as symbolic of civic pride and possibly an employment initiative. On the other, a sign of increasing defensive posture and a desire to live in safe protected surroundings? The implications in the second case is that the Roman Empire felt less safe, thus encouraging defensive works, and it may be no coincidence that Hadrians policy of border control is linked to this atmosphere. By the late empire Rome was in decline as a city, the center of power had moved to Constantinople, or in the case of the Tetrarchy, Trier and Antioch too. There was therefore less focus to emulate Roman civil engineering and urban development, and less wealth to support and patronise it. The old fanchise system was long dead as provincial towns became increasingly independent of central control and wholly concerned with their own survival in an unstable empire. The drawback to urban life is the ever-present risk of disease. Rome itself had outbreaks of disease and althogh there was some provision for health care and cleaniness, assuming you were wealthy enough to afford it, the average Roman lived in conditions not far removed from his barbarian neighbours. Noticeably, there seems to be an increasing prevalence of disease toward the late empire. It's tempting to believe this is linked to a decline in Roman culture with the influx of foreign immigrants over the centuries, but it can also be demonstrated that the spread of disease was due to Roman trade, that the merchant ships and overland caravans were carrying disease to all corners of the Empire once it emerged in one place. The comfort and wealth of Roman life was also immensely attractive to many barbarian peoples across the border. It would therefore be correct to say that the urbanisation of the Roman world was a victim of its own success.

What complicates things is British law. With any valuable finds, there's an inquest to find out who owns the items - The finder, the owner of the land, or the state. There is for instance a hoard of silver tableware locked away in an auction house in London because it appears the items may have been stolen and smuggled out of Rumania following a possible murder of the original finder. Whilst the current 'owner' is not under suspicion of criminal activity, the provenance of the items is suspect, and at least two major court cases on both sides of the Atlantic have failed to resolve this affair.

I suspect your students are more motivated than I was. Back then, I disliked the teacher, and with boyish insidiousness, proceeded to reduce her to a nervous wreck. She did try to motivate us though. There was this idea she had for team based learning with a mural painted around the walls to show the position of the teams as they progress toward France. She made the mistake of putting me on the team painting the mural... And I hit on the idea of a horizontal 'snakes and ladders'. She wasn't overly impressed with the artwork to begin with, and even less when she saw the crude police van directing those with poor pronounciation to jail and so back the start. I understand that the year after I left her tuition she turned into a fire breathing dragon and reduced her pupils to nervous wrecks instead... Maybe I shouldn't admit to being the cause of such suffering and misery...

Remember - A trolley is not just for Christmas.... Send

Try this. Includes a pic of an iberian style sword. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladius Before the adoption of the gladius, the Romans used a variety of swords. Most were of the 'antenna' type (referring to a swirly decorative pommel unlike the solid one of later times) and varied in length. Both thrusting or slashing swords were more or less common. A few had an elongated 'bowie knife' tip.