caldrail

Help... I'm confused.... What are people talking about?

Europe got off scot free? I'd love to put you straight on that but forum rules prohibit discussion of modern eras. No, you really did miss the point. What I was telling you that simply because an idea seems easy and digestible to you does not make it right. Every so often someone comes along and tries to boil everything down to a simple quote or equation (I've done that myself) but the inherent problem with doing that is that it ends up as an excuse for laziness - why learn all those complicated facts and extrapolations when a simple sentence will do? That simple sentence teaches you nothing, it's merely a label to cover a crack. The crack is still there of course, dark, dangerous, and probably likely to cause a failure of your simplistic intellectual construct under pressure.

The Romans liked the idea of humble agrarian ideals because it showed that their leader wasn't a power hungry man, and led by virtue of civic responsibility (which of course was absolute bunkum - it's rare for someone to be so motivated - most leaders lead because they want to, and because they profit from doing so). The same reasoning was used on estates of wealthy landowners. The front gardens were kept neat and tidy by slaves apparently happy in their work. The hard labout was hidden behind the house with retinue of oppressed menials. The idea is therefore emphasised by Roman writers to inform the reader what a good man the subject was (in his opinion). What it doesn't represent is some sort of generic icon. However, I will concede that the concept of rural bliss is a common feature of the Roman psyche, however contrived or artificial, and the idea that tilling the land brings responsibility for defending was a guiding principle behind the militia armies of the eralier Republic, which would therefore underline connections with republican sentiment, even in Imperial times. A false 'golden age' syndrome, you could say. That doesn't make him right.

Archery was a very effective form of tactical asset in ancient times. However archers rarely have any adequate defense other than riding on a horse, which required additional skill. The Romans did evolve an armoured mounted archer in the late empire which saw limited use. Finding archers was another matter of course. Unlike certain medieval kingdoms, there was no social requirement for people to practice the skills necessary that I'm aware of.

Hardly a description of Tiberius, and quite why you imagine Pierce Brosnan or Barak Obama are beachbums is beyond me. You have some very strange preconceptions there. Not least that you're comparable to Tiberius. No. No, you're just not. Sorry.

Religious emphasis changed quite a lot over the course of the empire, thus I don't think we can easily assert that 'tripartitie theory' applies to a question of iconic sympathies. It's as well to remember that gods were invariably local as well as pantheonistic, however aligned or interpreted. Also we have the persistence of foreign cults at all levels of society. The Roman Empire was after all not anything like as culturally homogenous as people often believe. It consisted of a variety of disparate peoples all under Roman governorship, with considerable cultural diversity. Since this empire revolved around the idea of of personal loyalty rather than nationalism, of localised worship and government, and that we have evidence of the requirement to observe dynastic divinity, the only common feature across the Roman empire is the guy running it.

World War Two. The British had brought in a great many commonwealth troops who returned with considerable self esteem and desire to see independence, plus Britain was economically knackered and unable to invest in colonial administration, or for that matter, colonial subjugation, plus the world was changing and since political movements inspired and supported by the communist bloc were struggling toward independence - not always for the benefit of their people - there were forces acting on Britain it could not contain. The post-war situation regarding the United Nations and the supremacy of America in victorious democracy also contributed - Britain could not justiofy appearing as an aggressor or colonial conqueror any more.

No, they didn't, and instead the imperial cult fulfilled that vacancy. Some Caesars were more charismatic, some never made the grade, a few got deified after their deaths, and one or two assumed godly status because they felt like it. The Romans were on the whole a superstitious bunch and evidence of votive offerings suggest rathr less sarcasm than you infer. Also bear in mind the number of offerings bearing the name of someone the offerer wants to curse - something I suspect the offerer thought of very seriously.

Tiberius is not known for harsh taxation, but he did reform provincial taxation to correct abuses and curtailed public expenses - a sort of austerity measure to restore financial order, which made him unpopular because it also meant no games for the plebs to enjoy. I don't associate Tiberius with Sweden or beachbumming.

It didn't always work. The German tribes in ad9 were not going to become Roman clients easily, and for that matter, please note that Hadrian's Wall was a defensive line on both sides, north and south - the area to the south, whilst ostensibly Roman territory, was never as settled as southeast England and represented a politically senstive zone. Similarly there were areas around the empire that were not fully loyal to Rome and responded to rebellions - such as Judaea, wehich had fundamental cultural and religious issues with Roman society. The main reasons that Rome did not expand much further was the difficulty of control. As the frontier got further away, so communication took longer, and opportunities for local rebellion increased dramatically. Note that the majority of rebellions against Rome started far away, and not always in places that didn't like Rome. There was for instance the Gallic Empire encompassing Britain and Gaul, set up by an ambitious individual who decided it was easy to break off a part of the empire for himself than try to rule the whole thing. As for the comment about gingers, Romans weren't concerned at all about racial appearances, just how latin you were. Besides, trade with Ireland would have indicated that there wasn't enough to justify another major campaign involving a sea crossing at such a distance from Rome. After all, most legionary legates were a suprisingly shy animal - a successful general is a dangerous beast - his army will by loyal, practised, and keen to see their beloved leader take the throne - that was why Domitian summoned Agricola home before Scotland was conquered and challenged his loyalty.

Well, strictly speaking, beachbums have no job or responsibility. Tiberius was the Caesar of Rome irrespective if he avoided getting down and dirty in Rome (according to Suetonius, he preferred to get down and dirty with nymphs in the garden and toddlers in the swimming pool).

Tiberius had no involvement in Jesus. That was handled locally by the governor of Judaea and the native government. As for being hated, that had more to do with his lack of sponsorship of public entertainment than taxes (Tiberius didn't care much for the arena). Not sure calling him a beachbum is accurate though - he was Caesar after all, and quite wealthy.

Tiberius was reputed to be a bit of a dirty old man, but depravity was no worse than other peoples reputations - such accusations were made freely and some men committed suicide because of them, irrespective of any guilt. In fact, Tiberius was more of a misanthrope, clearly short tempered and quick to anger, an unwilling Caesar, and basically a man with a Caesar-sized chip on his shoulder. He had little patience with the incessant rivalries of senatorial politics. He actually felt more comnfrtable leading legions to war and felt thwarted that this role was often denied him for civic administration. PS - He also felt thwarted because politics had interfered with his love life.

I woke this morning from my slumber as the rat made a loud plop exitting the house via the toilet. Not that I'd gotten much sleep - my computer has once again succumbed to the vagaries of electricity and fizzled out. There I was, working away, when the monitor went blankl and I could hear raw current arcing somewhere. With such a strong smell of burning I even had an electrician out in the middle of the night to check I wasn't going to burn the house down. Sadly it appears the rate escaped electrocution. Or maybe the the rat is now a fully fledged member of the Special Air Service, boldly sabotaging where no rat has sabotaged before. Well not to worry, the clocks went back this morning, so I've got an extra hour to figure out another way of ridding the world of little furry mammals. Idle Dreaming A couple of days ago I opened the back window and stared out across the early evening scene. The sun was already dipping below the horizon yet the sky was a lustrous blue, devoid of cloud, and even with the frantic rush of urban life at rush hour going on beyond the building site, it all seemed very peace and quietful. I could hardly miss the six or seven airliners on their way across the Atlantic. It's the usual practice with air traffic control to send airliners in waves back and forth. Too high and far away to see the actual airliners themselves, their short contrails were lit up bright yellow by the sun, looking for all the world like rocket exhausts of a salvo of ballistic missiles. For a brief moment one of the contrails widened and lengthened, then as the airliner turned on a new heading, it looked like one missile had been hit by some unseen defence, arcing downward to expend itself uselessly in the Atlantic. For a while I forgot these were aeroplanes packed with tourists, holidaymakers, or freight, and watched my imaginary missiles slowly diminish and vanish into the haze on their way west, mindful of how many times we all came to nuclear holocaust during the Cold War. Dream On Over the last couple of years I've had no choice but to economise on my gas use, what with rising prices and all. That won't suprise any British readers. I have in fact cut my bill down to a manageable quarter of what it was. No sooner had the gas company realised they weren't getting the same profit from me as before than they announced they were imposing a standing charge to make sure they do. Naturally I was miffed. I called the customer enquiries number - too busy. I called again a couple of hours later - too busy. Finally I made one last valiant effort to contact my gas company - too busy. Fine. Log onto the internet, please cancel my gas account. It's just blatant profiteering and I don't care to pay for their cars, mortgages, and holidays in the sun. And there was Cameron, blithely telling us to search around for a bargain tariff. Dream on mate. Date Of The Week A friend of mine known for his inebriation and habit of waking up in surreal and funny situations has been on the lookout for a girklfriend. Not a plastic shop mannequin - I think he's realised the downside of that lifestyle choice - and tells me this time he chose his dentist as a potential partner. Don't ask me why - I have no idea - but apparently she understands his sense of humour. I chuckled when he told me was going to, but fair play to him, he did. Not the lady he intended to unfortunately. His usual dentist wasn't there, so he made do with the foreign female dentist instead, and asked her out. "I don't understand your sense of humour" She replied.

Also we have to allow for pre-migration settlers under the aegis of the Roman Empire (the Romans called saxo-britons "good citizens"), and interestingly enough, also the germanic inheritance of the Belgae who had settled in southern England.

You mean Romulus Augustulus? He was only a kid anyway, and quite soon ordered off the throne by Odoacer. Over the course of the empire Caesars were either militaresque campaigners, or stay-at-home politicians, relating to their character and Roman cultural expectation. There was also a matter of practicality - a Caesar couldn't really afford to be far from power unless he was very secure in his position. Some Caesars rather liked being close to the Roman public and showed off shamelessly, people like Caligula, Nero, Commodus, and funnily enough, to a lesser extent Didius Julianus (they all came to grief, all violently). Some Caesars were more amenable to administrative styles, such as the Flavians, or Claudius. The later Caesars were more concerned with displays of power and grandeur (which is why the period is called the 'Dominate'), and to display, one needs an audience to display to.

You're the worst kind of propagandist who thinks he knows better than everyone else Guest private messge (some-1-better-than-u) Wow! Praise indeed. But Im not entirely sure what I'm propagandising. However, lets for the moment ask a serious question - Do I think I know better than everyone else? Of course I do - just like everyone else does, including my crtitic quoted above - it's a fundamental part of human self worth to believe your opinion is as good as anyone elses. Even when it isn't. As it happens I do know who some-1-better-than-u is - he made the mistake of calling me the same thing once before on a forum thread. However, despite his blatant immaturity, I remain calm, cool, and unconcerned that he stuck his virtual finger in my digital face. Mate, seriously, I was in the music business for twelve years, I know what criticisn feels like. But thanks for the compliment anyhow. More Facts And Figures For Non-Propagandists I also know other stuff too. My head is buzzing full of all sorts of stuff. Now before anyone thinks I'm on strange medication or suspicious substances, I can't help all those E numbers they put into food. So, did you know that my co-habitee at home is a rat called "You little monster"? You see, if you read my blog you'd know these things. Did you know how long rats live for? Three to five years in the wild, or until poisoned or caught by the human cohabitee who's getting a mite fed up of little puddles of piss on the kitchen floor. Did you know rats are intelligent creatures? Clearly in this battle of wills I'm outclassed by a small furry mammal, who so far has managed to elude every trap and stratagem I've concocted. Now unless this rat is Julius Caesar reincarnated (like most people are), it represents absolute and demonstratable proof that I don't know how to catch rats. No Hot Debate I had to laugh. There's some idiot on the internet news headlines who's declared that he's going to try and do without domestic utilities for a year to see if it's possible to live cheaply without them. Clearly he hasn't read my blog. It's already tried and tested mate. It's called unemployment. Propaganda Message Of The Week I know better than you. I know this because I have been told so. Now you know too. Knowledge is power! Send

Must be a rainy day. The library is half empty. Oh well, at least the early morning rush for a computer isn't the usual death before dishonour charge up the stairs. I see a certain youngster has been released from prison (he was jailed for drug dealing) and even he isn't bounding up the stairs the way he normally would. Actually most of the familiar characters are somewhere else. The guy who likes to threaten me every time a I say anything, the woman who thinks the library is her personal servant, the lady who doesn't know she hums to herself, the bloke who cannot bear to parted from his mobile phone, the eastern european ladies who chatter incessantly about eastern european things, and the strange guy who always asks at the desk for assistance and cannot make himself understood. All missing. You know, this would be a pleasant session if I didn't have something to moan about. I have been advised by the Swindon Critics Society that my blog is dull - sorry about that, but rest assured there's a blockbuster finale to today's episode. Idiots What is it with the internet just of late? Why do web page designers believe that I want lots of pointless themes and features that really only convert handy internet sites into a jumbled mess. There's nothing worse than software that tells you what you want. Or idiots who create all that stuff for no other reason than to justify their pay packet. More About Idiots Talking about idiots, just of late there's been a crabby old biddy at the library who seems to think I'm interested in listening to her whinging on about what a poor excuse for a person she believes me to be. Heard it all before, dear, and I don't listen to those who speak to my back. The funny thing is she sometimes makes sarcastic comments about how good it is see me searching for work. The reason it's funny is that I've been using the library computers almost daily for the last five years to help me find work. Obviously too busy moaning about my military surplus trousers to notice. More About Whinging As it happens I had reason to moan myself the other day. A new neighbour has moved in and seeing her trying to cut back the jungle the previous residents cultivated in the front yard, I took the opportunity to advise her how little sound proofing there is between our houses. Like there isn't any. With her predecessors it was like living in Albert Square sometimes. Anyway despite my advice next doors radio could be clearly heard all around my flat. Right. That's it. This needs to be sorted. She came to the door and after listening to my complaint asserted that her radio wasn't loud at all, even though it could be heard blaring out behind her from the back of the house. Not exactly quiet, is it? Holy Grail Secret Of The Week By sheer coincidence I discovered last night that I'm very distantly related to Jesus Christ. The maternal side of my tribe is connected to all those stories circulating about Renne-Le-Chateau and the Priory of Sion. After more than a decade of trying to debunk such things it came as a bit of a shock to find out my family is part of it. Now, I have to say I'm not entirely convinced that this revelation is even close to being factual, or even believable, but those of you who swear blind that the 'Blood Royal' legend has real basis now have no choice but to defend me from strange homicidal monks, or if you really want to do me a favour, that crabby old biddy at the library.

It appears I am wrong. Branding on the forehead was a Roman practice, if not one that was universal or encouraged. Runaway slaves and thieves were branded on the forehead with a mark, whence they are said to be notati or inscripti (Mart. VIII.75.9). When Sicily, after the Carthaginian collapse, had enjoyed sixty years of good fortune in all respects, the Servile War broke out for the following reason. The Sicilians, having shot up in prosperity and acquired great wealth, began to purchase a vast number of slaves, to whose bodies, as they were brought in droves from the slave markets, they at once applied marks and brands. Diodorus Siculus In like fashion a each of the large landowners bought up whole slave marts to work their lands; . . . to bind some in fetters, to wear out others by the severity of their tasks; and they marked all with their arrogant brands. In consequence, so great a multitude of slaves inundated all Sicily that those who heard tell of the immense number were incredulous. Diodorus Siculus The Italians who were engaged in agriculture purchased great numbers of slaves, all of whom they marked with brands, but failed to provide them sufficient food, and by oppressive toil wore them out .. . their distress. Diodorus Siculus This practice appears to have roots very early on in Roman culture. However, it is, not suprisingly, linked to cruel owners. In fact, Diodorus bnames one as Damophilus of Enna, who he describes as an unpleasant uncouth character. Purchasing a large number of slaves, he treated them outrageously, marking with branding irons the bodies of men who in their own countries had been free, but who through capture in war had come to know the fate of a slave. Some of these he put in fetters and thrust into slave pens; others he designated to act as his herdsmen, but neglected to provide them with suitable clothing or food. Diodorus Siculus The interesting thing is that such branding is mentioned in Roman entertain ment too. Good guys, what scrawny little slaves there were! Their skin was embroidered with purple welts from their many beatings ... All of them, decked out in rags, carried brands on their foreheads, had their heads half-shaved, and wore chains around their ankles ... The Golden Ass (Apuleius Lucius) Curiously the description is given of these slaves by an observer who wouldn't ordinarily see these things - a man magically transformed into an ass. The public must have been aware that branding on the forehead went on, as it did elsewhere on the body, but that it was not done by everyone. It does suggest a certain domination as much as punishment, but clearly not all slaves were so treated, as we know that owners sometimes had genuine friendships with their slaves - Cicero even mentions that aspect of slavery. Therefore we ought to conclude that Constantine had considered branding on the forehead a vile practice and in the light of increasing humanity toward slavery, decided to ban it.

There are opoints to consider: Cruelty to slaves had been notable in Rome's past (it had led to a number of revolts including the Spartacan War) ad reforms had been foisted on the Roman public. Claudius for instance had noticed sick slaves abandoned to their fate and brought in laws to prevent such abuses by their owners, and so on. However, an escaped and subsequently recovered slave was generally treated quite badly. Humanity toward slaves improves over the course of the empire (their lesser numbers improved their value - the lack of conquests had reduced the influx of slaves). That Constantine brought in a law protecting slaves from branding on the forehead is evidence of the humanity, but does not as such indicate indicate common use of this procedure, albeit it was used often enough to cause adverse comment, and I suspect was trend toward harsh treatment that had been highlighted somehow. I will search further on this.

There it was again - Another flicker of light. What on earth is going on? Curiosity got the better of me and I opened the back window last night to try and see what was causing that phenomenon. It was a pretty ordinary evening. Not too cold, perhaps a bit damp, and apart from the odd swish of a passing car, or the flitter of a bat to and fro, nothing stirred. The local cat was making its way home across the yard, a sign that the foxes were coming out to play. Then I realised what those strange flickers were. Far away to the west a thunderstorm was in progress, too far away for thunder to be heard. Normally our vision is very limited in stormy weather and we only get a more immediate and dramatic experience. It just so happened there wasn't much cloud to impede the firework display, and that's the first time I've ever seen such a distant storm in this country. What a fascinating and surreal sight. Close Quarter Battle Has anyone seen this series about special forces and military tactics? Generally it's quite informative if not exactly gripping, but I had to laugh at the reconstruction of a French Foreign Legion attack on an airfield. They couldn't afford blanks and had to add barrel flashes with some cheesy special effects. Naturally. Tantrum of the Week "What gives him the right to use that title?" screeched some lady at the library earlier today, clearly outraged that her socialist sympathies were being ignored by legal rights and thousands of years of tradition and custom. Off with my head? Not around here lady. There's been a few people muttering darkly just lately. Not that it makes any difference. I'm entitled ,you see, and that's all there is to it.

That's an exaggeration surely? Some slaves were branded, others forced to wear identifying collars, but how could that master ever sell the slave, or for that matter, show what a great guy he was by granting manumission to a slave so branded on the forehead of all places? I really don't believe this.

It's more to do with ritual laziness. If you have slaves to clean up as you go, why bother to be tidy yourself? They would simply extend an empty goblet and expect a slave to refill it with wine there and then. These Romans expect service from their slaves and are going to be very put out if they don't receive it without question. The treatment of slaves varies accoring to the relationship they have with the master but table slaves were definitely menials to most owners.

It's not always a question of knowing people. Remember that travel is inherently more risky in the ancient world thus people of high station, who would be more disposed to finding company among their own class, would sometimes approach or send a slave on their behalf to enquire if an overnight stay was possible, which ordinarily it would be (manners and hospitality would make this usually a formaIlity. The thing is a blunt refusal would not be forgotten. High class Romans socialise for other reasons thatn someone to talk to.

Just to be more precise, the mansiones network had grown over the course of the empire and was at its peak in late 3rd/early fourth century. It was however a restricted network, available as part of the Cursus Publicus system set up by Augustus (it was not a post office, as often described, but a system of forced rental and way stations), whereby a traveller on official business can expect to appropriate temporarily animals or wagons according to an entitlement based on both status and the travel warrant (which set out what the traveller could demand from the public). Owners of the animals/wagons would be compensated from public money at rates set by the governor, though in fairness, compensation had ceased to be effective by the late empire and arrangements were based on loans or barter. Official entitlement varied from ten wagons for an imperial procurator and his son, to one wagon for a centurion. Soldiers were not entitled to wagons but interestingly could demand animals for transport (which is interesting given what I've read in Roman sources about soldiers taking beasts whenever they wanted - people weren't getting compensated and it seems the soldiers often abused the system). Such abises were checked at times - Constantine made it clear that no-one could simply demand property from a nearby peasant, and had to summon assistance from the way station. However, this official travel did not usually include family members (although the warrant might allow it - I have no evidence). Travelling at their own expense is another matter. I suspect that hospitality was largely available for those in need and one wealthy family might be only too happy to allow another to stay a day or two - a chance to socialise and make contacts after all. Incidentially I have no idea if the Cursus Publicus system included boats. I imagine it did although the longer travel distances would inflate the problems associated with demanding citizens goods and vehicles.