caldrail

As I understand it, the problem Neanderthals had was down to their settlement patterns, reliant on localised forage and hunting whereas the Cro-Magnon were migratory and followed the food sources.

Monarchies? Most of those are countries run as republics whilst retaining a royal family. I hardly think that's an issue. As for being parasites, they're at least active as diplomats for the most part and corporate elites are sometimes more parasitical.

Seriously? Europe has five or six times the population of your homeland,.iI accounts for nearly a fifth of the world's GDP. It has its own space program, a major unification project, and most of its nation states belong to a dominant military alliance. One might more realistically argue why certain antipathic empires have any practical uses, especially given recent events.

It's an interesting facet of Roman politics that taxation came to serve policy as much as finance, especially given that greed was fundamental to Romans as much as status. Augustus was of course hardly a saint where money was concerned, but that was quite routine in elite circles so the Romans saw nothing unusual in it. When they do mention greed adversely, you have to wonder of the scale of it, with Varus reported as leaving Syria very much the poorer and then chosen by Augustus to oversee taxation of occupied Germania without official annexation.

It depends. 'Expert' academics are notoriously conservative, who often rely on conformity to underpin their public reputation. As I'm merely an enthusiast who earns a living outside of academia, I have little to lose when reconsidering Roman history though for most of it I happily agree with mainstream opinion. Mary Beard however isn't that far removed from the mainstream, it's just that she's more perceptive of clues from existing archeology. Her mission has more to do with revealing the human side of Roman history and in that she performs a very useful role.

Similar idea to anti-personnel mines, without explosive devices.

If that's the criteria, I humbly suggest Egypt or Assyria as arriving at the prize well before China did.

Roman roads were not a modern transportation system, they were there primarily for communication, with access to hostels for quick horse changes. Nothing to stop merchants using the road of course other than it might be faster for long distances to send the goods by water. since unless they were on official duty, the hostels did not serve their purposes. And of course, as this post makes obvious, strategic redeployment was simplified - but I say this advisedly, don't get too carried away with the concept. Remember that modern Russia relies on their internal railways in much the same way yet this does not make for guaranteed logistics.

Earlier today I was on the hunt for WW2 imagery for a modelling project. I stumbled across this..... Can anyone spot the deliberate mistake? No? Well let's clue you in. This is the Norwegian Army on the set of The Empire Strikes Back during a break in filming. Notice the film prop in the background, the modern plastic crates in the trench, and the tarted up 'weaponry'. Not everything is what it's labelled as!

In fact the Romans used a hand cranked version of a ballista able to repeatedly fire (though I imagine that device was on the smaller side) during the invasion of Britannia. It was discarded quite quickly because using five or six bolts on a target that was killed by the first seemed wasteful.

Mary Beard is a great communicator and anything she produces is worth checking out. Don't agree on absolutely everything she says but so many times she's reminded me that Romans were human. Different times, different standards, different ways. Yet at times we can't help recognising a little bit of our modern experience that we share with them. Mary is very good at describing that.

Okay. I made a mistake. Postumus wasn't the legate of the II Augusta, he was the camp prefect (Top Centurion). Boudicca ended her days by poison; while Poenius Postumus, camp-prefect of the second legion, informed of the exploits of the men of the fourteenth and twentieth, and conscious that he had cheated his own corps of a share in the honours and had violated the rules of the service by ignoring the orders of his commander, ran his sword through his body. Annals (Tacitus) Nero sent reinforcements from Germania, which accounts for the mentions of Gemina. The whole army was now concentrated and kept under canvas, with a view to finishing what was left of the campaign. Its strength was increased by the Caesar, who sent over from Germany two thousand legionaries, eight cohorts of auxiliaries, and a thousand cavalry. Their advent allowed the gaps in the ninth legion to be filled with regular troops; the allied foot and horse were stationed in new winter quarters; and the tribes which had shown themselves dubious or disaffected were harried with fire and sword. Annals (Tacitus) The commentary from Bill Thayer is as follows: The probable course of events seems to have been roughly this:— Suetonius hurried ahead with his light troops, while the fourteenth legion and part of the twentieth followed by forced marches: the second had been summoned to join him, probably at Wroxeter (Viroconium), but its commander Poenius Postumus refused to leave his own front defenceless against the Silures of S. Wales. At London, the situation was found to be desperate, with the rebels in overwhelming force and the ninth legion virtually exterminated. Suetonius, therefore, fell back along the Watling Street until he met the legionaries, was forced to an engagement "somewhere in the Midlands," and only survived through being allowed to choose his own ground. (Bill Thayer) This implies the legate of the second legion was not present with his men. This is not explained.

They had to in order to expunge shame, or possibly be decimated.

The Legion II Augusta were in Britannia at the time. It's commander, Poenius Posthumus, refused orders to mobilise and committed suicide. Gemina was the name of two legions, XIII and XIV. The XIII was based in various places around Europe, the XIV took part in Boudicca's defeat at the Battle of Watling Street.

I notice the graphics in the videos show wide roads being used in a modern fashion. No suprise to me, I've often had to argue that the Romans did not prioritise transport in the way we do, bur also the actual archeology usually shows narrower roads, only wide enough for vehicle traffic in one direction - the point is, Roman roads were not intended for vehicles but couriers on horseback and columns of men on the march. Sure, a wagon can use a road, but goods were as likely to travel by water, rivers and coasts, using local trackways to connect with local destinations.

Vanilla wine? I so want to try that.

As someone who has actually suffered mini-strokes, the symptoms described in the sources are epilepsy. The obvious effect is often little more than light headedness and a struggle to balance, barely noticeable to anyone else. That said, having reached 55 years of age in relative fitness, preparing to go on campaign against the Parthians, it strikes me he was due to live on for some years, epilepsy or not.

About time someone got caught, but the reality is looting archeological sites is a serious concern worldwide. I remember a group visiting a site in North Africa for a television documentary, only to find a large area of pot holes and mechanical digger trenches. Former colonial powers get a lot of modern criticism for taking stuff away from the countries concerned but their own local looting is way beyond that, money being such a great motivator.

If I remember right, Time Team tried out a Roman style brew to mixed responses.

Marching camps did not have a palisade. I used to think so before I looked into how they could guarantee the supply of suitable wood. They dug a ditch and rampart which was patrolled at night. They would have all been up all night finding enough trees to cut down, drag to the site, and erect. The two sticks they carried were for measuring. Military behaviour is nothing new

Does anyone know when the worship of Sol Invictus began? I ask because I'm watching a tv documentary where the investigator is shown a cave used by early Christian worship (c. ad68 specifically) and that a Sol Invictus engraving on a rock surface shows some Roman legionaries in what is now Israel were in fact spreading worship of Jesus. Doesn't sound right to me.

Just think, in two thousand years some students could be studying 21st century greeting cards messages

How many us write great poetry? Mine is downright awful and basic. For historical interest and insight into Roman culture, yes, of course Catullus should be read and preserved.

I think people often forget or have little concept of how individualistic Roman military equipment must have been. Everything was handmade, and so quality and detail must have varied enormously. Adding that personal touch is something inherently human, it's why warriors wore tattoos, why modern military aircraft sprout nose art once the fighting starts. Primeval display instinct, a touch of superstition, military pride.

Groan.... That video makes a whole load of mistakes. The most glaring is that Roman legionaries were all taught to swim. Simply not true. Vegetius suggested that Rome should do that in his De Re Miltaris because he thought it was a good idea based on a single precedent, but never Roman policy. What is most apparent however is that the video focuses on engineering. That's a modern perspective, and I say that because the Romans were a deeply superstitious people with strong concerns about rivers being the home of gods that would be offended by bridges. I do agree the Romans had clever people among them and used their capability well, but that had more to do with common sense than advanced technology. The engineering skill was no more advanced than we see in other strong civilisations of the time apart from one or two ideas like arches (due credit there). For those studying history, never take videos at their word - always apply critical thinking.