caldrail

Your charity humbles me. Its a little ironic but weather is wonderfully sunny at the moment, not like the usual grey clag we get at this time of year.

Guitar? Yes, I had that Waynes World experience in my younger days, staring lovingly at that expensive instrument as telling everyone "Oh yes, it will be mine". Lets see... My first was an indifferent fender strat clone. Soon got bored with that. Then I got a Kramer Sharkfin. Not a great guitar but it could feedback like a stradovarius - you know what I mean. I had one of those Van Halen Kramer Baretta's once too,

So this beaver is looking for a hot date? Well, given how dull my home town is I have nothing to fear Just in case anyone misunderstood that, you're wrong. Wash your mind out with muddy river water at once

Caesar claims to have destroyed several hundred oppidae during his gaulish campaign. That worked out at something like one a week, clearly difficult to accept. I said once before that Caesar claimed victory over gaulish defences that simply surrendered rather than fight.

Way back when I was working in warehousing I often used to see people spending time in the toilets, usually sat in their cubicles smoking or reading newspapers behind closed doors, at least when they weren't pulling the toilet apart with their bare hands for something to do. It's something of a british tradition and one I used to sneer at. Problem is, things are a little chilly in England right now. We've had sub-zero temperatures for a week now and last night it tried to snow. Some people may chuckle, but the England grinds to a halt whenever it snows, we really have no idea how to cope with the stuff. It sems my neighbours decided to go elsewhere for their new year too, which means they switched off their heating. If that wasn't bad enough the radiator in my living room has decided not to work anymore.... So... Cold... The irony is that my bathroom, ordinarily the coldest and draughtiest place in the house, now happens to be the warmest. It's been a while but I've rediscovered the joys of the 'workplace university'. It Gets Worse Still New Years day began for me at something like eleven o'clock in the morning. Bleary eyed I stirred under my multiple duvets and grimaced at the thought of the chill atmosphere. Still, I must endure, so I relunctantly fell out of bed and reached for the light. It didn't work. The electricity was off. And of course, since my gas boiler is electrically fired, so was the heating..... Even.... Colder.... Naturally I phoned the electricity company and explained my plight. The lady on the other end of the phone was very polite and in the course of diagnosing my problem asked me if the neighbours had similar problems. I don't know, I've just gotten out of bed. "Oh?" She chuckled, "I wish I could stay in bed". Funny enough, I was thinking the same.

Don't worry, your secret is safe with me

Threat doesn't seem to be the major cause, after all, thats why our biochemistry has adrenalin. Duration and insensity certainly, but more to do with the rnviroment. Constant explosions and shell whistles disturb the mind more in some people than others. Disturbing enviroments are used in interrogations for that reason, such as loud white noise. As you say, there was little source of this of thing in Roman times, so its constant disorientation rather than constant danger. I suspect though that many Romans who did suffer regret (rather then stress related disorders) kept quiet, rather like soldiers do today. Again, since combat was not unusual, death never far away, and a culture of violence ever present, fewer Romans suffered regret than might be found today. For those looking into the legionary mindset, it might be worth studying the French Foreign Legion - there are similarities but beware of modern connatations.

Interestingly, the operators of gladiatorial re-eanctment schools who let people experience 'arena combat' tell us the germans are by far the most competitive of their customers, and that other nationalities tend to be much less aggressive. I suspect, much as happened two thousand years ago, the relaity of 'fighting' in these schools is going to suprise its entrants. You have been warned !

Hi there. As its the start of the new year, its the time for new year resolutions. Sadly the UN doesn't recognise my little nation state but that won't stop me. Luckily though no-one keeps resolutions for more than a few days which explains why third world dictators get away with flouting them. Most of us are required to pay lip service to these resolutions by our inlaws. Dictators have the unfair advantage that they can shoot theirs at will. So without further ado, my first lip-service to new year resolutions is to announce that its a secret. Since I live in Britain and have declared myself an independent state, I've no doubt that British Intelligence already know what my new years resolution is, which means everybody elses intelligence service know as well. So I might as well tell you all. I hereby resolve to not get bothered by that idiot who rings my doorbell at four in the morning. Who is he? Thats a secret, funnily enough. Defence Secret of the Week According to secret information recently made public, it seems that Britain in the 1970's was barely able to defend itself against the Soviet threat. Our fighter aircraft had enough ammunition and missiles for a few days conflict. Given we all had four minutes to live once war was declared, I sort of wonder whether investing in more ammo was worth it. Perhaps a free distribution of condoms to the public would have been better value? Safe sex you see.

Without war, our species would wither, sadly. War is an extension of our animal behaviour, in that rival packs compete for survival, and in fact our nearest genetic neighbour, the chimpanzee, has been observed conducted border patrols and raids into 'enemy territory' just like we do. The struggle for survival improves our agility, senses, strength, and violent potential in a darwinian natural selection, though some might argue in modern war the scale of killing has the opposite effect. Either way, we group ourselves for mutual protection and benefit, and vioklence is a primary method in nature of achieving your ends, so like it or not, we humans will carry on fighting. The view that human beings are the highest form of life is something deep in our psyche and a point the Romans displayed in the arenas for public entertainment. Of course we're not, we're simply the end result of one strand of evolution and not guaranteed a place at the top of a food chain. Is anything better to come? Who can say? But to emerge as a dominant species probably doesn't require enlightened behaviour. Anyway, thats enough philosophising. Its absolutely perishing cold in Britain right now, doom and gloom in the news, but Rushey Platt is on party alert. Have a good one everybody.

His personality, experience, and mindset are not the same as everyone elses. I remember hearing about operations in Angola. A group of mercenaries, mostly inexperienced, were posted in one place and one let off a rocket grenade mistakenly in his enthusiasm. Their leader, a guy named 'Callan' (not his real name) confronted these men and demanded to know what idiot had fired. The gentlemen decided to own up, and Callan shot him dead with a pistol there and then, telling everyone else not to disobey. Funny enough, I've been asked that question before. Not having been part of a military regime, it's impossible tio answer. I would like to think I would behave with as much decency as I could, but warfare does sometimes force decisions on people they would rather not have to make. Oh, you are so wrong. You really are. There is a strong element of honour and professional behaviour in some of the better trained armed services, but you will find that as has always happened, warfare brings out the best and worst of people, and that scurrilous behaviour is as common as it always was. However, Saturninus was merely a symptom of a general Roman condition of the time. Ammanius Marcellinus and Vegetius, both contemporaries of Adrianople, made it clear that the average Roman soldier of his day was less than well trained, and in a general state of unpreparedness for battle. Zosimus writing some time later makes a very strong reference to it too. The Roman army at Adrianople was simply not able to conduct a large scale battle with any efficiency, and indeed, one of their gemnerals, Sebestianus, had tried to persuade Valens not to pursue that course of action for that very reason. Sebestianus had, in the week leading to the event, gathered a corps of men he considered capable and force marched them ahead of the column (where they defeated the Goths at the River Maritza). That amounted to something like 5-10% of the army available to Valens, and I note that the battle actually got underway because Iberian (auxillary?) troops acted without orders. As terrible as war is, its moral integrity is a relative value, not an absolute one, and much depends on the viewpoint of the indiivdual. I agree - Saturninus wouldn't have lost sleep over his decision to run away - nor did Richomeres, who returning friom the campsite and discovering the battle underway, turned around and went home to Constantinople. Richomeres did well politically, Saturninus did not. Did he regret his decision for that reason in later life? We'll never know.

Cheers. Incidentially.... For Interesting People Who Do Know The Mille Miglia is a race that is of course one thousand miles long, not kilometres. Congratulations to everyone who got that right and knew something about classic motor racing, always a subject to fire the blood. Happy New Year Reassessed Good grief they're all at it. Gaza is turing into a bombing range, Democratic Republic of Congo is a warzone, Sudan don't know the meaning of peaceful communication, and... Well I'm sure there's plenty of other armed struggles in the world. Come on guys, stop fighting, go out and get merry. Its fun. But I suppose you'll only get violent when you get drunk....

Well this isn't really the forum to discuss modern firefights, but the fact some insurgents were shooting wildly still doesn't mean they were shooting to miss. Thats a ridiculous assertion because deliberately missing the target is pointless. They were shooting toward the assumed target area even if they were unable to shoot at a target. The reason is they don't want to get hit, so prefer to rely on volume of fire (always a bugbear with modern automatic fire) rather than standing there taking aim and thus exposing themselves to risk. Statistics in this case is misleading because it's assumed by the men shooting that not all rounds will their target - but that if they fire with enough weight then some rounds will, on average, hit something. It works. It goes on every day around the world. Of course the value of discipline and training in battle is as important in modern firefights as it was in Roman melee. So some inexperienced teenagers ran away when confronted close up? They clearly had no leadership nor background of close melee, nor I suspect, any convenient means to fight other than their trusty AK's which they generally used at a distance. Statisitcs don't tell you that, but it really is an important point. The Romans of old were trained to fight close up. Their enemies were brought up to do something similar although often relied more on bravado and longer swords. But sometime around the beginning of the fourth century the good old gladius had been dropped to be replaced by a longer spatha, a trend that had begun earlier. The reason was training had declined and people were less keen to fight so close. I know its only a matter of inches, but believeme , human beings have personal 'danger zones' and getting too close in a fight is uncomfortable, people much prefer to fight at the edge of their reach. Which incidential;ly, is what happened with those teenagers. Meeting an enemy they considered too close for 'safe' combat was too much for them. The same sort of thing happens in Roman times especially in the presence of cavalry. Roman horsemen did not close in unless they had a situational advantage, whereas the dominance of later cavalry began when horsemen started increasing their intimidation factor by riding right up to enemy troops as a matter of course. This was one of the reasons for the Gothic success at Adrianople for instance. The Romans backed off... and got confused.... and some really did manage to run away, as Saturninus did with his men. The remaining survivors couldn't run away until nightfall and really only began to fight back when they realised they would die there if they didn't break out.

I've just watched a tv program about a guy who bought a classic Maserati for

You're right. One guy achieves it by leaving his curtains open at nights. Hey, it works for him... But then again, survival isn't about hunting and killing farmyard animals. Its about using the enviroment to your own advantage.

Hand to hand combat isn't necessarily stressful. Many human beings enjoy fighting (though it doesn't suit everyone). The modern war is a different enviroment. The risk is ever present although most soldiers soon learn to dismiss that kind of thought. The noise however is another matter. Shellfire, especially after a prolonged exposure, can have very bad effects on peoples state of mind, something the Roman soldier did not have to contend with. Airmen sometimes 'lose their nerve' after constantly exposing themselves to danger. Romans were just as susceptible to PTSD as we are, but there was less to cause it back then. I can assure you that soldiers do not shoot to miss, and such a practise never occured in WWII. It may well be that much firing was essentiially random since the enemy had the incovenient habit of hiding from your fire, but even that served a purpose. It persuaded the enemy to stay hidden so your side could advance without being hit by aimed fire. In fact, the majority of firefights in WWII took place at something less than 500 metres - since the enemy were not keen on being spotted in the first place and that ambushes tend to be more effective is staged at close range. Further, because of the difficulty of sighting enemies, its also common for soldiers to shoot at areas they believe harbours enemy troops whether it does or not. Plenty of AA fire was directed at Venus for instance, troops thinking the light in the sky was an enemy aeroplane. A more willing or more capable killer? Its more to do with social conditioning, experience, and necessity. I knew a chap at work who had once been jailed for soccer violence. Although a reformed character, he was somewhat rambuctuous (I love that word) and would play aggressively at the drop of a hat. He was also very quick and calm in violent situations. None too bright though, but he didn't get many arguments. However, I will concede that since people with higher IQ's find acceptance more difficult, there is a risk they become more amenable to psychopathic behaviour.

Survival is so macho. Tell someone you've survived the wilderness and instantly your manliness score doubles. Women become breathless near you. Men become your greatest buddy and hang on your every word. At least I believe they do because the only wilderness I've survived is Swindon, and unfortunately I'm reliably informed that Swindon doesn't do much for your manliness. The good news is that I survived Christmas. Survival is one of those dark arts you see featured on tv sometimes, with Ray Mears being clever and Bear Gryls being heroic. I notice neither use any of those SAS survival manuals you see in bookstores. I therefore conclude the art of survival is doing something without an instruction manual to find out how. A bit like your first date for instance. The reason we have to treat Christmas as an exercise of survival is public expectation. We're all expected to be happy. We're all expected to hand out presents. We're all expected to party on down. I suspect most of us have, economic woes or personal inclination notwithstanding. This year I survived by doing as little of these things as possible. I've decided that survival is dull. Lets face it, how much do I not want to invite someone to a Christmas party whose topic of conversation revolves around eating creepy-crawlies? Maybe they'd be better at barbeques? At least they could set the thing alight. No Sex Please, We're Swindoners The guy who lives across the street from me has done it again. Literally. I used to think it was a woman who lived there but apparently it's the bloke and he now has a new girlfriend. Gee, must be tough finding women who like having sex in view of the whole street.... Christmas Prezzie of the Week No, it wasn't the camera. So would the owner of a dark blue Vauxhall Astra who drove past me whilst I was out taking photographs on Christmas morning please note - you were wrong. I was very happy. (sigh) Ok, you want to see a photograph... Well, here's my xmas pic of the year... Christmas Day Pic 2008 No Vauxhall Astra owners were harmed in the making of this pic

The Romans were not unique in the ancient world for brutality. In fact, the only reasons they have such a reputation for it is becuase of the scale and entertainment of it. That was their culture. These ancient people, not just the latins themselves, grew out of violent tribal cultures existing in Europe. The broad range of personalities is probably no different than it was back then, but they were born into cultures that admired and tolerated aggression. The Roman way of life was inclusive of macho thuggishness. Their sports, partly inherited from the greeks, were violent. Its that risk of injury that made competitors 'heroes' or admirable at least. In military circles, we see the Romans exploiting these martial qualities of various peoples, including their own. They also developed methodologies that parallel modern ones, in that men were taught to act obediently and kill by command. Women and children were not exempt if the order was given. So what can we conclude? Roman soldiers were not generally guilty about their actions. They had acted under orders (usually) and had done their duty. The dead were dead and the living survived to enjoy life. We also notice that Roman soldiers commemorated their fallen with expensive tombstones. That death was all around them was accepted, and indeed, the Romans were comfortable with the idea that life was short and ever present - what choice did they have? The superstitious nature of Roman soldiers must also have played a part. It was the will of the gods that a man meets his end as much as human decision and action. Auguries taken before battle tell us that the Romans were asking the gods how things will turn out, that it wasn't just their own skill and experience at work. The upshot of all of this is a situation where men predisposed to violence are dehumanised in a harshly disciplined regime. The legions got men to bond - the whole point of the conterburnium "Close friends", the eight man group who were always billetted together. There was a feeling of brotherhood within the legions and indeed, they refer to each as 'Brother' frequently. These men were living in a world apart from the society they lived amongst. Although its true the legions had regular contact with civilians who traded and depended on the military for their living, there was also an uneasy side to it, as we know the Roman soldiers were not above theft or intimidation to get what they wanted. The nature of warfare in ancient times is much closer to basic animal confrontation than todays battles. Men fought in 'packs', using items that simulated claws and teeth, using items to protect themselves from this violence. Ultimately, when melee began, it was you versus the man in front of you. The human psyche is capable of this activity without any great psychological harm, but what we can't ignore is the 'ritual' side of human behaviour. Animals tend to have these rituals to avoid physical harm in confrontations. Humans deliberately choose to harm others as a means of winning these confrontations, and since rituals take time to develop, the faster-changing human cultures make this difficult to achieve, thus violence becomes an ordinary way of achieving success, so ultimately the individual tends to rationalise his actions to absolve any guilt. What the Romans did not suffer was the 'total war' of modern times. They moved across country in columns of men, not as widely dispersed troops fighting every inch of the way against an enemy they generally can't see. Whilst its true that ambushes were a frequent part of ancient warfare, so were the cavalry screens sent out to avoid them, and the sense of situational isolation we see in modern conflict rarely occured in Roman times. If you doubt the underlying strength of attitude and cultural disposition, notice the civil disorder in some parts of the world today. When these people adopt violence, they find psychological power in it, and rapidly become used to the effects of the violence they commit. Addendum - I should note that in the Jewish War of c. ad72, the Roman legionaries who broke into Jerusalem began to loot and kill freely as Romans always did in these circumstances. They did however, according to Josephus, become so tired of the killing in huge numbers that eventually they stopped, rounding up any survivors for sale as slaves to Egypt as labourers or to provincial arenas as victims of the games.

I think it's speculation, nothing more. Ok, they've used pictures as inspiration, but it remains a best guess (or even worse if you accept what our forum members have said above). If the researchers had done the reconstruction direct from her own skull, I would accept it. Until then, simply an interesting proposal and nothing more than media hype.

The spirit of Christmas is not yet dead. I see that pensioners and beggars in Milan will get free hand-outs of caviar. Is it just me, or are the Italians doing better than Britain? Calendar of the Week Christmas is nearly upon us. The traditional season of thirty year old hit singles and toy adverts on tv. The same old festive movies are hitting our screens again. Well... now that I'm offically famous, I've decided to join the gravy train and announce the first official Caldrail merchandising. Even better than that, with Christmas spirit not entirely dead, I 'm giving it away FREE! http://www.mediafire.com/?3ugzgmmdjmd

One of the great certainties of life on the dole is that you adopt a routine just as much as if you were working. Only you don't get a company car. My routine is very simple these days. Some people will say I need to get a life, others that I don't know I have one. Some will say that I'm a Has-Been, others that I never have been. They're all wrong of course. But if you don't have money, then your richness of life must be found elsewhere. I now find some of my richness of life at the local Central Library. A rip-roaring rollercoaster ride it might not be, but it happens to contain a microcosm of life all on its own. As I entered yesterday a bunch of carol singers in black uniforms chanted through Silent Night in the library foyer, with some very happy guy conducting from sheet music. They seem very tuneful and together, I doubt the conductor is needed.. Or maybe he is?... I heard a bum note there. God will not be pleased. Never mind them, I've got better things to do than watch carol singers smitten by thunderbolts. I sit down to do my stuff on the net. A quick glance around and I notice my young lady friend is nowhere to be seen. What? After that wonderful introduction I wrote in my last post? I mean, there's such a thing as being fashionably late, but I wasn't expecting a no-show. Women. Blow their cover and there's no pleasing them. Irritating Person of the Week Or maybe she was avoiding the guy in the next cubicle. Clearly an african native judging by the ethnic websites he was looking at. Good grief, surely not a Zimbabwean spy checking up on my blog entries? No, something far more insidious. He opened a bag of sweets and chomped his way through them without any discretion at all. In the quiet library atmosphere I could hear every squelch and the smell was indescribable. If God has reloaded his Thunderbolter, please smite him with both barrels. You just know there's no justice....

Its got a lot to do with the quality of acting/direction. The modern BBC dramas all have the same style. There's no character study, just a lot of overacting and odd dialogue with breathless editing and flash imagery. Its all style nd no substance. You never have time to actually learn anything about the characters but I guess thats deliberate, because there isn't any to learn in the first place. A very hollow experience and one intended for those whose attention span is limited.

I had parked a car near a friends house for another regular visit. Almost immediately this chap was there, bicycle to hand, asking me if I knew anyone selling a car he could do up. Just an old banger would do, something like the the same make and model I was driving at the time. I had no choice but to apologise and tell him I didn't know of any car for sale. Surely he didn't want my old Green Gerbil? The Nissan Cherry was like a set of clothes at the time and seeing as I was unemployed back then, I couldn't replace it. The next time I was unemployed a car drew up beside me on a busy high street. A well dressed young black man leaned over the passenger seat and called my attention. "Hey mate, I'm a rep and I've got lots of stuff I need to get rid of. Take a look at my stock." He said, and pointed to a heap of small cartons littering the front seat. He's asking me? At the time, I looked like something the goth metal band dragged in, and I really do believe that everyone else on the street looked wealthier than me. Six months later he stopped again. I was just about to cross the road when he swung round the corner and stopped in front of me abruptly. He started to give me the speel but instead I told him off for not using his indicators and driving in a manner liable to knock pedestrians down. Then I crossed the road and left him behind. Of course I can't prove it, but I really do believe all three were investiogators checking up on me as an unemployed person and attempting to find out how I earned my cash. The reality was that I earned it by signing on the dole, but people do get suspicious sometuimes. Now I have a new lady in my life. I see her in the background sometimes, looking at books or staring at a library computer without actually doing anything. Occaisionally she asks me for assistance on the PC but there's never any warmth about her, none of the "Come up and see me sometime" demeanour that I associate with romantic interest. Is she another investigator? Time will tell. The Moustache Has Gone Robert Mugabe has made a speech to his party faithful that he will not be replaced as leader unless they want him too. Didn't I say that was the case? In any event, he has no intention of stepping down for any reason whasoever. Heck, he's even shaved off his moustache in an effort to look more cute and cuddly. You're not fooling anyone Bob, and by the way, Britain isn't interested in ruling Zimbabwe. Trust me, its just a destitute cholera ridden disaster. I mean, your bank has just unveiled a ten billion dollar note. We've got enough financial problems of our own without worrying about yours. Oh sorry, I forgot, Zimbabwe doesn't have any problems now does it?

I forgive you

Screeching is unfortunately neccessary unless you're blessed with a powerful voice. The background of distorted guitar riffs doesn't leave a lot of room to be heard. Then again, there aren't many talented singers in metal anyway. One CD that crossed my desk recently was brilliant until the singer started. Then again, I remember Dokken live at Hammersmith in the eighties, supporting german metal band Accept. Dokken, never a man to be humble, led his his band to an astonishing gig. He really did capture the audience and thats with the usual rocked up ballads he performed. Accept, a very tight and professional band themselves, struggled afterward despite the crowd pleasing headbanging rock like London Leatherboys Dokkens material may have been a little mawkish and american, but his talent came through.