Julius Ratus

How exactly did this battle halt the spread of Orthodoxy into Western Europe, when the two churches were still unified for a century more? The Bishop of Rome didn't split off until 1054. On topic now, in ASCLEPIADES' list of battles he mentions the Battle of Poltava. I put my vote in on this battle, where Peter I ended the century of Sweedish military dominance in Europe, from Gustavus Adolphus to Charles XII. To this I would like to add the Battle of Kulikovo Pole since there was a bit of 'Mongol Bashing' going on earlier. Here the Russians under Dmitri Donskoy whalloped the Golden Hoarde.

I remember a joke where Guy A asked Guy B how he was so lucky with the women folk. Guiy B responds, saying, "I just go around and ask them if they want to have sex." The other man, shocked, says that he must get slapped alot. Guy B retorts, "Yeah, but some of them do want to have sex1" I have a friend who uses this approach almost religiously, and he has far mroe luck than other friends do, who use the friendly, nice approach.

IIRC, the primary diety in Sparta was Artemis.

IIRC, in Latin 'AE' was pronounced 'AI'. Caesar was pronounced Kaisar, like in German, based on the Greek spellings of his name. Aeneid would be pronounced, Ai neh id, with the stress on the 'NE'.

The primary service rifle used by the Ottomans was the Turkish Mauser, firing the standard 8mm (7.92X57mm) or the older 7X57.mm cartriges. Today, a Turkish Mauser can often be obtained for between $100-$200. They are rather reliable, though I still prefer the trusty KAR 98 varient.

Yeah, well, Doc has to perform an oral defense so that she can really be a 'doc'. There very well could be some major merry being made tonight...or tears in my beer. I'm hoping for the former. Good Luck. I just finished the Russian exam and if I don't get an A in that class I'll eat my boots. Hopefully you make merry tonight rather than the alternative. This being finals week I have had my fair share of beer (has to have been at least 3 or 4 litres in the past few days).

This: http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?automo...si&img=1718 Check the rest of Northern Neil's stuff. Wow. If I'm ever across the pond, NN will have to teach me how to do 15mm buildings. I can do tanks and stuff, but no buildings.

And then... Julius Ratus has two finals today (Roman Republic and Russian Lit) so he needs to unwinds. He grabs a krater of Hellas' finest, downs it, and does "The Worm" in the atrium.

Sounds like the author was pulling his info out of his hat. He offered no proof other than his own horny speculation. That said, I do not disbelieve his premise, it is logical, but I think that a lot of money has been wasted on his research. Besides, he mentions bondage and such. It's not called bondage, Dr. Tim, it's called rape. Bondage is how Sadists get their jollies in these more civilized times.

How did the last two lines come from the first one? The first line sounds like it is saying "Your wives are your property; so approach it (her) how you please. Do a good deed first (like kill an infidel); and fear Allah.

On the plains, maybe. Remember, Native culture covered the entirety of both North and South America. The Aztec, Mixtec, Zapotec, Maya, etc. had large empires on the same scal as the European ones of the time, and they were as sanguinary or more so than their European counterparts. In the woodlands of the East coast the Indians were rather advanced as well and had territories. When the Eastern Indians began forming into larger groups the Europeans came. The Iroquois were had formed a confederacy, and in the Jamestown areas, all the local Indian groups were consolidated under the power of 'King' Powhaten.

Looks like it might be promissing.

The 'friendly natives' thing is from the cartoon 'Pocahontas', not history. The American Indians knew how to fight for themselves, just ask Geronimo and Red Cloud. The reason they lost to the Wasichu (white-eyes) is that we had vastly superior numbers, superior firepower, and lots of diseases. Back in 1000 AD, the reletively settled Greenlanders who cam over here, were no match for the Natives who had the numbers and the weaponry (a bow was still more effective than a sword) to throw the Vikings out of Vinland.

Russian Orthodox.

I meant the Lapps replacing the Indians. As I remember, the roles were reversed. The Vikings settling in North America were from Greenland, hence from Iceland, and were rather tame as far as Vikings go. They weren't raiders, but rather settlers. They seem to have been driven out by the Natives.

Proudest moment of my forum life!!! Now I have between 80 and 120 men to do my Consuls' bidding with.

I just saw Pathfinder last night, and it wasn't that bad, if you can seperate historical fiction from blood and guts. This movie was all blood and guts and almost no history; beyond the fact that there were Vikings and American Indians in America and that they did quarrel. If you are cool with this than the movie was well done. I haven't seen the old Sweedish version that this was taken from, but I think that the movie would have been more plausible with Lapps in it, though. Anyone else seen it? If so, what did you think?

As much as I dislike the Thebans, being a Spartaphile, they really had no choice. The main plan was to wall off the Peloponese and hold out there. The Athenians knew they would recieve no mercy from the Persians, so their decision to join Sparta and the Peloponnesians was less out of bravery than out of desperation. The Thebans, being north of the Isthmus of Corinth were being sold down the river. Given the choice between fighting alone for the defence of others, and going with the flow, they chose the obvious choice.

Sometimes open warfare is refreshing. Could anyone imagine how boring a Optimates vs. Populares thread would be without MPC ripping into us gutter scum .

My personal definition: Catholic means the Universal Church. Let's just say that which church is The Church is debated. Modern usage of the term Catholic almost always refers to the Roman Church. The Roman Church as a seperate entity goes way back, probably to the founding of the religion, having always had their own Bishop. The Roman Church as a seperate church all together I think goes back to the 1054 schism and the Filoque controversy. When they started adding words to The Creed, they became a different church from that of the East. Before 1054 I would not refer to the Churches being Catholic or Orthodox, because they were still one Church in Communion with one another. They were different organizations though. In the East there were the Greeks, Antiochians, and Alexandrians, one could possibly add the Slavic churches to this as well, despite their being under the guidence of Constantinople. In the West there were the Romans, the Germans, and the Celtic churches, and there were differences between them. The German Church was not fully part of the Roman church until after the reign of Friedrich Barbarosa. My 2 cents worth on a complicated topic.

If Caesar deserved to die, then the pompous swine who refused to compromise with him prior to the war should have swung beside him at the gallows. As things turned out they all did die in one way or another. Pompey was beheaded, Cato gutted himself, Scipio died at sea, Cicero lost his head (metaphorically, then literally), and the 'liberators' died on their own daggers. Had the 'better men' been able to look beyond their own self-serving noses and compromised with Caesar, maybe the Republic would have survived, in its already corrupted state. Do you think that if Brutus and Cassius had taken over, some magic spell would have been lifted and the Republic would have gone back to the way it was at the Founding? Some other demogogue with pretty words would have taken over, probably Cicero himself. The Republic was dying as it was, violence was the name of the game. Every time the Senate got to disliking someone they ended up dying or being deposed. All Caesar did was play the game to its logical conclusion.

I wouldn't say the Tet Offensive was a total failure, if it was a failure at all. It damaged the American public's image of the war and it severely damaged the VC. Many believe that the Tet Offensive was not supposed to work, that the NVA wanted to remove some of the grass roots groups in the South who may have not had total loyalty for the govt in the North. Looking at it in this devious light, the Tet Offensive really was a brilliant opperation. All in all I am pleased with Kosmo's list. While it is imperfect, no poll is ever perfect. His options give a well rounded look at all the major 'little wars' fought for the latter half of the 20th C. Plus, he left the 'other' option open so if anyone has a candidate fo their own they can offer their alternate.

Perhaps bouncer would be a better title. I figured since it is you who brings rotten posts to Tartarus, it would be you who drags drunken sots out of the party .

I would vote for Richard Brake if he wasn't so old. He has that gaunt blonde look that seems so fitting for Caligula. He also has a penchant for playing rather rotten characters (think Doom and Hannibal Rising) BTW, he will be playing in a movie with Titus Pullo later this year, called The Outpost.

I wish the HBO Rome series, would have lasted long enough to have given us Caligula. In the spirit of wishful thinking, of all current actors, who do you think would best fill his little boots (forgive the pun, it was irresistable)?