The Augusta

Viggen already had created a little something for the book reviews. But after informing him of this thread, he expanded it it to include all reviews and made it more visible. So there you go! What can I say? Things weren't this efficient under Augustus! Thanks, men.

Ursus - that review has got to be as brilliant as the film itself. But may I make a humble petition to the Triumviri. On returning to the Forum after nipping off for a mo I clicked the review and read it by Ursus but then it was a bit of a job to find the actual thread. I knew it would be under the Colosseum somewhere, but I was confused. Would it be possible to have a dedicated 'Reviews' section all on its own for we challenged ladies with blonde streaks? It's only a little suggestion but it would be so much easier to just click into that particular sub-forum and find the thread we need to comment.

How very true! Nor was the classical world alone in its brutality. People in England as late as the 18th century flocked to see men hanged drawn and quartered. And as you rightly observed further down in the thread, Calders, watching brutality meted out to others in the name of entertainment or - Gods forbid - 'justice' - is in no way indicative of a person's courage in battle.

Felicitations to our very own bear. I shall toast your health, sir, in a variety of beverages.

Oh? Do tell! Is there a 'new Romantic' phase you would sooner forget? Ahem.... "Ah, Ah, We fade to Grey...Fade to Grey...Fade to Grey...." (Visage) or even better: Prince Charming, Prince Charming Ridicule is nothing to be scared of.... (The Incomparable Adam) Come on, Neil and Calders, you know you want to do the movements What a lovely little thread. Takes me back - just what I need after a hard day's work.

Hehe - quite so, Klingan. Hey, Ursus, don't be so stuffy If you've never been so drunk at a house party that required you all to get together in the living room dancing to Macarena, you've never lived! Oh, the hangover memories...

Congratulations to Neil - and I've never been one who subscribes to the theory that all power corrupts Well done, Neil - I'm sure you will be a super mod - you deserve the honour for all the work you've put in.

Me too. Call that a Latin test! It was pure general knowledge, by all the gods! However, general knowledge is another subject that is falling by the wayside these days. I'd never seen this little thread before.

Oh, I've read The Stand, GPM - one of his best. Yes, I loved that one - thought it was pretty well-written, and perhaps some of his best characterisations. I actually read both versions over the years - the cut-down one and the full. I didn't think they did it justice when they dramatised it.

It's not bad, but I much preferred her book 'Here be Dragons' about Llewelyn Fawr, Prince of Wales during the reign of King John. I think she captures my vision of John, as well as enhancing my love of Welsh history. I've never thought of getting this, Sonic. I enjoy her writing, but do you think I'd enjoy the novel? I should say that I have no interest at all in Welsh history (I don't mean that nastily in any way - it's just not an area that grabs me). Could I be converted? I'll give it a go one of these days and let you know. I've now turned to total trash for the daily bus journeys and am wallowing like a pig in..... in Stephen King's Christine After that I intend to get back to serious research - I think my brain will need to be reminded that it works. Ah well, even old Stevie has his place in the dreary agony that is my daily route to and from work.

This is exactly where people go wrong. The Romans didn't try to assimilate populations and convert them to Romans. What they wanted was populations who obeyed their laws and paid their taxes. If however, their population was amenable to doing things the Roman way, then so much the better,, and they encouraged that. It was never compulsory. That's a damned good point, Calders - I wasn't looking at it that way. You know, this is a fascinating topic really. I'm sure we've visited the motives behind Roman expansion throughout the ages of ancient Rome, but it's a good topic to debate in real depth.

No, it isn't. Very schools have teachers who know what latin is, much less with the ability to teach it. I started school in 1965 and had not one lesson in latin ever. In, fact, only one person I've met had latin lessons at school. Would that be me, Calders? If not - now you know two of us! It was compulsory at my all girls grammar school for the first three years, but lots of us took it O-level at least because the Latin master was such a character. But you are right - it is taught very little these days - even the great independent schools are only maintaining it as an option for 'geeky' lads and lassies. I spoke with a secondary school teacher only a couple of years ago who said that the general consensus among teachers today was that the subject - along with Greek - was far too hard for young kids, and it should be left to the sixth form! Ye Gods - I was 11 years old when I first learned how to chant Amo, Amas, Amat by rote! What's more, I can still conjugate any Latin verb today. You don't forget these things when they were 'hammered' into your susceptible brain. (I can still decline my nouns too). As to the question further up the thread about Latin being a lingua franca? It was only ever used as the language of the establishment bodies, such as the law and the church. I am a genealogist and it is not uncommon to find older parish registers (anything up to the late 18th century in some outlying parishes of Cheshire, for example) written in Latin, and wills made during the 16th and early 17th centuries can also come from the record office in very, very bad scribe's Latin. (Trust me, they're a nightmare to transcribe and translate!). I doubt the farmers around Kent chatted on in Latin over their ploughs - and as Julius said, the most civilised of the Britons lived 'in a place called Kent'. I think they still believe him! Ursus made a telling comment about we Brits being a nation (during the Roman occupation) of separate, warring tribes. Ursus, I have news for you. Nothing has changed at all! We are still like that - even though we don't care to admit it publically. Even among the most enlightened of us, you will still find areas of divide; we have turned our differences into humourous, good-natured teasing, but believe me, it is still there. Note GPM's comment above regarding the Scots. He covered it with humour, but I'll bet he meant it. It is perhaps the very make-up and nature of the indigenous peoples of these isles that proved more resistant to lasting Romanisation than some other areas of the world. If we can't really unite ourselves, how could the Romans expect to do the job? I don't have to tell anyone on here that I'm as big a Romanophile as the rest of us, and although Roman Britain is not my area of expertise (in fact, to be honest, it holds far less interest for me than Rome and the Med itself), I think the majority of us here in Britain (always allowing for the New Age tree-huggers) are favourable to the impact the Romans had - but I'm not sure just how long that impact actually lasted.

Caesar, I have been doing a bit of digging for you regarding what was considered THE best rendition of the Toccata - arguably Leopold Stokowski's version in 1957, but I can't seem to find a recording that is still purchasable on the Net. I'll keep looking. As with most things Classical, I know it's a cliche, but all the best ones are dead or retired There was a Eugene Ormandy version in the 70s I think (off the top of my head) but I'm not the biggest fan of this guy's conducting. I'll dig about on MDT (I'm a subscriber) and see what I can find for you. Chances are, we are talking an old recording with all its crackles ETA: I have managed to find a version of the Stokowski, Caesar: Here However, this is orchestral. I did find a not half bad organ recital Enjoy!

A somewhat illogical statement, forgive me. He would hardly have run it on his own! Even Augustus didn't do that. But I think we've agreed on this thread that his age was immaterial. He just wasn't a capable administrator - nor would he have been had he been 60 when he became Princeps!

Yes, if you'd been seling it for $50 - which is about

And that, my dear Sylla, is a brilliant post! Well said!

He was 25! Augustus started his career at 18 and became 'fully fledged' as the Princeps at 32, if you count it from Actium. Now if you'd chosen Nero as an example of youth thrust into supreme power I might have agreed with you. A Roman in this age would have been fully mature at 25. He wasn't too young, he was just unsuitable

This is like comparing apples and oranges! How on earth can you compare a juvenile actor playing the young Octavian, to a middle-aged man playing Augustus. For what it's worth, Simon Woods did a very good job with young Octavian - despite some people on this very board 'just not getting' his performance. I wasn't enamoured of Pirkis, and blustering Blessed tends to be the same in many of his performances. He fitted the Gravesian model, but he wasn't an Augustus for me. I have yet to see a fantastic Augustus. I'm still waiting - although I do remember an excellent Octavius in Julius Caesar back in the 1960s at Stratford when I was little. The actor - Corin Redgrave. I also remember a decent portrayal by Ian Charleson in a TV version of Antony and Cleopatra in the 70s/80s. I will never forget the sarcasm and sneer as he spoke the line: 'She will be buried with her Antony'. Nice stuff, and nice inflection there. It's a bit of a restrictive poll, so I'll refrain from plumping for either of 'em. Sorry. And the link is obviously from someone who hasn't had a great deal of experience in watching Drama series.

As for me, AC, I will definitely not be Romanising in Britain this year, due to all sorts of commitments. I wish you all well and I'm sure I'll catch up with you again next time.

Belated Birthday Hails from your fellow footie sufferer, GPM I'm drooling at the thought of you at Kiplings.

Felicitations, Chris - hope you had a grat day.

You know I still doubt it's your real birthday, MPC - but many happy returns, all the same. Hope you have a great day. And where are you these days? Felicitations, O intractable one! I'm sure Neph can rustle up a suitable garland to brighten up that black toga.

I cannot confirm your last notion but it would surely be interesting to consult an expert! The thought is intriguing. Yes, like Klingan, I'm not sure I agree with this, CN. I think it was certainly true of some Republican portraits, but certainly early Principate portraits were highly idealised after the Greek models. As to your avatar - and may I say, this is one of my all-time favourite Roman portraits, despite the man it portrays - we have had a discussion on the forum before as to the 'relative verismo' of Severan portraiture.

It is because of Quinti the rooster, he did not crow the other day so some people thought that the assassination took place on the 14th . Touche, Caesar! I like it. Ach - thank you for your very erudite explanation, but we are splitting hairs to the nth degree here. I have a Jacobite ancestor who was executed on 30th July 1746 (old Julian calendar, before the Gregorian came in here in England in 1752). I still honour his memory on 30th July every year. As you say, it's no big deal. We can get bogged down with all this pedantry, but thank you for explaining the discrepancy between the 15th and 14th March 44BC.

Michael Grant for me - hands down. I'm afraid our house is in a bit of a turmoil at the mo, so I can't put my hand on my Tacitus, but if you google the 60s Penguin edition you should find what you need.