caldrail

The quote from Josephus describes roman soldiers of the Jewish War in the 1st century AD, it does not apply to men raised as a citizens army (almost a militia) two or three hundred years before. Thje reforms of Marius were very far reaching - for the first time Rome had a professional army and a structured training program. The training involved with the consular legions was nothing like that. Men were expected to be warriors anyway (they were Romans for crying out loud ) and the level of military skill was not the same as post-marian legions. There is no guarantee any training took place at all in consular legions, that was the decision of the commander and if he was satisfied his men were up to it or he couldn't be bothered with such activity, or because the situation was pressing and no time was available, then training wasn't included. Its important to realise that the consular legions were not armies raised professionally, with ordinary citizens turned into trained soldiers as would happen later. Instead, they were citizens called upon to fight for Rome. Further, the belligerent nature of the roman culture of this time shouldn't be ignored. Whilst the consular legion was effectively an amateur army, the people in it were used to the culture of fighting and were acquainted with weaponry anyway, and the older experienced men may well have taught by example as mch as lecture to their neophyte youngsters amongst them, so the new citizen warrior was learning y example as much as anything.

The huge storm in Burma has left as many as ten thousand people dead. Its hard to understand the scale of disasters like this. Even the secretive burmese government has felt it has no choice but to ask for foreign assistance. No doubt many people are pointing fingers and blaming Global Warming etc etc. Its as well to point that terrible storms have happened before, its just that the modern media make us so much more aware of what happens around the world now and that given we only live for a short time, so much of what has happened in the past is something we're not often aware of. We've certainly been made aware of this one. I'm thinking in terms of something like the change in british climate in 1314-15. Previous to that was the Medieval Warm Period, a time when agriculture could have done better if the agricultural system hadn't been held back by tax and the manorial system. But in 1314 it all changed. The summers were exceptionally wet and the winters hard. Starvation became commonplace. Doesn't this all sound familiar? Our recent summers have been wet also, the flooding exacerbated by settlements in flood plains and little opportunity for rainwater to soak away where great swathes of concrete and asphalt cover the ground. Since the black death spread from India thirty years later and reduced the population of europe by 3/4, lets hope the similarities aren't too close Important Reminder Its Compost Awareness Week next week. Make sure you know where your compost is, and use your compost responsibly. As long as compost levels are properly controlled, we can offset our Compost Footprint and escape the worst of Global Composting. Log-On of the Week BJ, our new all-singing and dancing Lord mayor of London, has succesfully logged on to his PC in his new office. Way to go B. Keep up the good work.

No, but it might get miffed and roll away...

There must have been as wide a range of approaches as we get today. Sure, there was a trwend toward the 'body beautiful' especially by imperial times, but I imagine some people paid lip service to the idea of looking after their bodies and you got those who abused it terribly. I'm thinking in terms of the excessive behaviour of roman socialising in some circles, and I also suspect that for many poorer romans, the caring of the body was not a priority compared to ensuring food, drink, and a roof over their heads.

That pretty much says the same as me.

Or better still, are these 'legiones Urbana' the four legions raised as an emergency measure (and therefore unique) during 217/216 BC? The phrase Legiones Urbana appears to be a designation of imperial formations. The Roman armies for a long period consisted entirely of what we might term militia. Every citizen was, to a certain extent, trained to arms during a fixed period of his life; he was, at all times, liable to be called upon to serve; but the legion in which he was enrolled was disbanded as soon as the special service for which it had been levied, was performed; and although these calls were frequent in the early ages of the kingdom and the commonwealth, when the enemies of the republic were almost at the gates, yet a few months, or more frequently, a few weeks or even days, sufficed to decide the fortunes of the campaign. The Roman annalists assure us that a Roman army had never wintered in the field, until more than three centuries after the foundation of the city, when the blockade of Veii required the constant presence of the besiegers... ...Hence, for upwards of seven centuries, there was no such thing as the military profession, and no man considered himself as a soldier in contradistinction to other callings. Every individual knew that he was bound as a member of the body politic to perform certain duties; but these duties were performed without distinction by all - at least by all whose stake in the prosperity of their country was considered sufficient to insure their zeal in defending it; and each man, when his share of this obligation was discharged, returned to take his place in society, and to pursue his ordinary avocations. A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D

Have you seen that Tom Hanks movie about being marooned? Its a lonely vigil, here in my safe warm cave on Washout Island. Every day I do little else than send messages in bottles hoping an employer will come across it and send a boat to bring me back to civilisation. One bottle came back on the morning tide with a note inside saying - You haven't done the first bit. Oh? Whats that? Light signal fires? Jump up and down at passing aeroplanes yelling very loudly? Becoming intimately familiar with a football? I've seen some rejections in my time but good grief if these guys don't want me to work for them, why didn't they just send a letter saying Sorry, no chance Mate like everybody else? Confession of the Week Yes its true. I did. I attended a school reunion for the class of '78. After thirty years its incredible how life has aged and changed some people, yet how a handful seem immune to the ravages of time. One guy I recognised instantly walked in out of a time warp. It was peculiar how the relationships with some of my former schoolmates has survived - we got talking as if thirty years hadn't happened. Sadly, for some it had, and inevitanbly there were those with personal tragedies. It does make you realise that maybe life hasn't been so bad, so I guess its back to sending messages in a bottle with renewed vigour and long meaningful conversations with a football.

Where you live matters. So does your occupation. Thankfully as a warehouseman I'm considered amongst the safest drivers Its all down to the law of averages. If you're the slowest, safest, least accident prone driver ever born, if you drive a car regarded as risky you get hammered. Cars like the Ford Cosworth were regularly attracting quotes of

Its an interesting idea, but there's no reason to suppose the armies of the early and mid republic trained as a matter of course. There's no doubt that some training did occur. marius did not really introduce anything new in his reforms - what he did was formalise and standardise what was already going on on an ad hoc basis in legions already. Thats the important point. Training was not standardised before Marius, that it was done informally and only if the commander thought it desirable. Its easy to fall back on what we know and assume that training is as necessary for soldiering as it is today - well, strictly speaking it is - but back then fighting wasn't unusual, it was part of roman culture and had been right from the start. Whereas today recruits are given intensive training not only to learn and practice military skills until its second nature, but also to change the mindset of the recruit into someone who will perform willingly as a soldier as opposed to the reluctant civilian. For the romans, this change of mindset was hardly necessary. Arguably, the usage of weapons required training as much as today, and again I would agree it would have been desirable, yet the use of weapons wasn't something so alien back then, and remember today the average person rarely becomes familiar with military hardware or its effects. Also the idea of a citizens army is something that assumes the average citizen is a potential warrior. Apart from the amateurism that this naturally entails, you really shouldn't ignore the aggressive nature of mediterranean culture. I'm curious about these legiones urbana. Since under etruscan tradition each city would raise its own forces as an independent defensive army, something the romans adopted themselves, are these leghiones additional troops or the 'army of Rome' itself?

Could? Surely imperium was the right to command rather than the actual circumstance of doing so, which was dependent on circumstance. The praetor had the right to command an army limited to one legion. The two Consuls of Rome, were each allowed an army of two legions. The romans however levied men as required. Whilst traditionally the consular 'army of four legions' was enacted every year, they were only called upon to assemble in times of hostility. No, the number of legions did vary sometimes. The Third Macedonian War for instance required more legions, and the Punic Wars involved drafting men to replace battle losses. I'm not sure the militia urbana (if that actually existed in the early/mid republic) could be described as a legion. The urban cohorts of imperial times weren't considered so. The citizen army spent very little time training, and this amateur status of roman soldiering was no different to any other hoplte army of the time. Fixed training schedules came in with the reforms of Marius. It is true that armies were trained on occaision and for specific reasons rather than as a general policy, so for instance we see a spartan mercenary training the carthaginian defenders to fend off roman attack at the last moment, not at the onset of campaigning. The servian legions were levied in March and dissolved in October. If they had trained for a few months, what about their enemy? Are they going to wait patiently for the romans to finish drilling?

Why go to all that effort? No-one can find their way around town anyhow...

Difficult to compare insurance. So much depends on your driving record and the risk assesment of the vehicle you want to drive. I didn't realise petrol (sorry, gasoline ) was that expensive in the US.

The news is full of our local elections. It seems the media has smelled blood, and have joyfully reported the embarrasement of our prime minister. The headlines are coming thick and fast as Labour returns its worst result for forty years. Gordon Brown of course says his party needs to listen and then they can move forward. Listen by all means GB, but people are starting to vote with their... erm... vote. In Zimbabwe Mugabe has lost the vote, but not the war. After twenty eight years in power, he retained enough votes to call for a rerun of the election. And I suspect he'll keep on until everyone votes him back in whether they have a gun pointed at them or not. Thankfully, Ken Livingstone is not so determined to continue as Lord Mayor of London and it seems Boris Johnson, the colourful character for whom no public cock-up is too embarrasing, will walk away with the title. Its about time. At least BJ knows he's a comedian. Traffic Diversion Of the Week On saturday night traffic on the M4 motorway (the main highway west from London to Wales) will be diverted through Swindon town center. Well... I know the local authorities want more visitors to our fair town, but doesn't diverting traffic seem a bit desperate? So tonight Swindon town center will be full of irate and confused drivers trying to negotiate our road junctions in a vain bid to find the right exit back to the motorway. At least the Man Who Headbutts Cars will be busy.... Celebrity Update of the Week Melinda Messenger, our very own local blonde bombshell, is to split with hubby Wayne Roberts. Wow. Where else can you get news like this, hard hitting stories about people that matter?... Huh?... What do you mean you've never heard of her?.... She's a celebrity for crying out loud, and for those who genuinely want to show sympathy for her, her entire range of paper towels is now available by mail order...

Then again, I doubt the americans are paying nearly

Absolutely not. There is no evolution between the roman legion and modern organisation. The ancient romans based their organisation on the formalisation of the warband, whose loyalty was directly to a leader (although the citizen army did attempt, as did the republic generally, to forestall personal ambition by sharing command). The modern regimental system evolved from the 1600's and owes its loyalty to the unit or nation state. There is no direct connection between roman practice and our own. The classic roman legion as we know it had almost ceased to exist by the late roman empire except in a reduced form, and in any case the romans were increasingly reliant on foreigners for their defence without any roman organisation. Thats the first time I've heard that in thirty years of wargaming, and the current symbols we use were drawn up by nato strategists and bear no connection to legionary practice. Can you supply any documentary evidence for the literary use of roman unit symbology? I really would be interested. By studying its command structure, its methodology, and understanding the roman military as an entity unrelated to the modern day in that respect. The laws of chemistry are exactly what they've always been. Its our understanding thats changed, and using medieval logic to understand another way of organising soldiers is not going to help.

In Britain BMW is trying to portray itself as the choice car of professionals, whilst half of those on the road are actually driven by out-of-work young afro carribeans. Currently, BMW outsell the Ford Mondeo, which is about as ordinary as a family car can get. Therefore the sales campaign is to win back the class they lost back in the 80's.

Although heat conduction would have caused adjacent buildings to catch fire spontaneously, the fire spread faster along open streets that naturally tended to capture wind. This means the fire might spread in direction not aligned with the prevailing wind direction. tacitus reported that those men attempting to fight the fire were attacked and forced back, and others seen spreading the fire were claiming to be acting on orders. The main suspects are.... 1 - Nero, acting against senatorial rivals by ensuring their homes (and thus their places of political business) were destroyed, also because it meant he had an opportunity to rebuild Rome as his own personal city, Neropolis. Notice Nero wasn't present when the fire started and he made very visible efforts to co-ordinate the relief effort. 2 - Christian Activists, since Nero and the city of Rome were deeply loathed by christians of the period for their decadence. The Book of Revelations in the bible dates from this time and clearly states the resentment felt by judaean exiles. 3 - Opportunists - who sought to profit from land exchanges by some advantageous land clearance 4 - Political rivals, who decided that a disaster would end Nero's career and notice that the fire restarted on the estate of Tigellinus, Nero's advisor. 5 - Bad luck, in that another fire in the tinder-dry city of Rome got out of hand and that the current weather assisted the spread of flames. Cyclones are natural air movements that you find everywhere in the world. There's one pushing over Britain as I write this. Sometimes it has strong winds associated with it if the pressure gradient is high, but not always.

But Colonel Dodge was a military man who instinctively attempted to describe the roman legions in terms he understood. Regarding the roman classes of the servian era, although these classes existed in the voting assemblies at the time the record was written, the various allotted equipment was very different from that issued to roman soldiers of the day, and since sculptural displays were all the evidence to go by, the writer used that to construct what he thought was the allocation. The reality of hoplite warfare is that you fight with what you brought with you. Although in general this means your wealth dictates who well you're equipped, thats not a binding factor, and if you glance through the definitions of roman hoplite equipment described, are you really suggesting the romans bothered themselves with such defined distinctions? Of course they didn't, the hoplite army was a citizen force who turned up to fight with anything they had. The romans had long experience of war and I really can't see them ignoring practicality, especially since the whole point of the citizen army was to put aside social differences for the common good. The later writer was piecing it all together and made assupmtions that the various classes were visually seperated - as indeed was the case in his own time.

Warfare is never a sure thing. Inferior armies have sometimes won out by better leadership or strategy. A lot depends on circumstance and who was the sneakier, since ancient battles were sometimes decided where and when the forces met. Now operhaps Stilicho has an advantage here? Caesar, for all his leadership qualities, was careless on campaign, and against a worthy adversary could have have been suckered into a trap. On the other hand, you might argue that he would turn it around on the field. Its impossible to say, though I suspect Caesars legion was more effective as a fighting force.

There is a very deep problem is describing another world in terms of your own. Thats how people used to think in the middle ages. By using modern terminology and function in describing something much older and different, you aren't really making it understandable at all. The roman armed forces were organised differently from ours and for that reason need to be studies as they were.

Yep. Can you guess why?

British politeness is a funny thing. I'm not known for being polite, yet people who use more direct language than me are. Its very much in the eye of the beholder isn't it? The real reason I'm not considered a polite person (besides my natural bluntness) is that I don't quite fit the expected ettiquete and protocol for the social group I happen to be with. Even the yobboes and grunts who swear like troopers and behave like animals can be considered polite because in an intuitive way they give deference (or at least enough of it) to their social seniors. I on the other hand have more anarchastic leanings and to me a 'man in a suit' is probably a con artist or a complete idiot, not the 'man in charge' that the yobboes see. So the man in the suit talks to me and is quietly astonished or upset that I don't visibly recognise his superiority, thus I'm not polite and the yobbo is. Men in suits like BMW's and Mercedes - they're considered suitable cars for a 'man in charge', whereas to me they're hoplessly boring luxury saloons I wouldn't buy if a gun was held to my head - and indeed, my love of sports cars has seen me lose more than one career for that very reason - that stupid human love of status symbols. You might argue the sports car is also a such a symbol. I wouldn't, although I do agree the sports car is often a genital extender, but again for me my choice of car is about my own personal enjoyment, the driving experience, not what it means to people I pass on the street or leave behind in my rear view mirror. Its just a cross I have to bear

Nonsense. During most of republican history (i.e., with the exception of the very early republic), consuls were elected by the Comitia Centuriata, not by the senate. Thats perfectly fine with me. Please take it up with the author concerned. I think that the reason modern commentators try to equate ranks, is to compare the size, and perhaps the purpose of a unit. No it isn't. The modern system is well known to us, very familiar, and therefore warm and comfortable. The roman system is different and requires some consideration, its unfamiliar to us. The modern system is built on the regimental system, the roman system is based on the warband. The fact two formations two thousand years apart have roughly the same size is neither here nor there. A modern regiment is approximately the size of a legion, thus a colonel. The colonel is a modern rank with a defined role. He is the commander of a regiment. The romans didn't use the regimental system (though I admit they came very close to one) and therefore the legionary commander was not a colonel. The modern colonel does not timeshare his command with his peers as happened in early and mid republican Rome. Was a decurio a sergeant or a lieutenant? No, he was a decurio. A sergeant is a rank derived from medieval horsemen of lowly status, it has no connection with legionary organisation, nor does his authority, status, and responsibility equate to the sergeant. Save for such as Caesar and Patton, (on occasion), generals do not lead from the front lines. The roman tradition is that they did - now bear with me on this. In the original roman society, before the eternal city was actually founded, men led warbands on raids or very rare battles. This tradition led to roman civic leaders taking command of their military. Thus we see consuls, elected politicians, given authority by virtue of their job to command two legions. Praetors, being lesser magistrates, were only allowed to command one. Now as armies grow larger and more sophisticated, it becomes necessary to hang back and command from a position where visibility and communication are expected to be at their best. You might argue generals don't like getting involved in the sharp end, but this simply isn't so in roman times. The great majority of roman generals (I shouldn't really use that word ) were willing to fight if it became necessary - that was the roman way - that personal courage was an example to your lessers, a hangover from the warband of older times. However, the roman status system also meant that these commanders wouldn't usually fight alongside the men because they were not common soldiers. If a local unit is/was hard pressed, an adjacent unit, if it is/was able to, could try to ameliorate affairs on its own initiative. This was the beauty of the roman system - it allowed this initiative and flexibility on the field but it also required an understanding between commanders and subordinate centurions. Cannae is the case in point. It must have been frighteningly obvious to the centurions on the wings of the roman advance that they were going in the deep end - but did they react? No, because there operational orders were to advance as one, to steamroller the carthaginians back into the sea. This is the flip side of the roman system, the disadvantage, in that the commanders set the operational orders before the battle began, and that precise ordering of individual cohorts was difficult. Centuries would not be re-ordered at all.

Agreed, but they aren't ranks are they? They are responsiibilities allocated temporarily. These men were not given control of formations designed to co-ordinate units beneath them, they simply had the authority to control them. Thats the difference.

No, british computers bring up a dialog informing you politely that it wasn't possible to log you on and that you may need to seek further assistance...