The Augusta

Ursus - I don't want this thread to grow cold, so I'm bumping it a bit. Have you any particular topic you would like me to work on? Are you still interested in a series on the women for instance? This was aired before by Julia Caesaris and myself - and Julia was to have first go with her bio of Julia the Elder, but she's probably busy as she hasn't been on for a while. I would be happy to start off with a few little short biographies - Liv, Antonia, Julia, Octavia, Messalina, the two Pina's et al if you like. But if you wish me to do something more in depth please let me know. I have a half-finished bio of Salvidienus on my hard drive, but I'm not sure he'd fit in with this project. I wouldn't mind doing something on the rise and fall of Sejanus, or the Piso affair...whatever - just give me the nod in the direction you want. (If you were happy to have a bio of Liv - I could do it in half an hour!). And another question? Do we post them here in this thread or PM them to you for collection elsewhere? (Brain still slightly befogged after the York meet where beer flowed in abundance...)

An official grand welcome to you, Drusus Nero - may you live! Thank the gods we're getting a few more Claudians in here. We've been very thin on the ground. You will get no argument from me regarding 'I, Claudius' being the best Roman drama ever to hit TV - so please feel free to comment on my review. I have outlined there exactly why I think the series can still captivate an audience.

Yes, AC - I have purposely left it out of my report - as it will be funniest coming from you! And in any case - it was all your fault.... Great photo of old Calders, there! I will leave his grand naming to our wonderful Nephele. She can do it if anyone can! Paging Nephele Carnalis....

Well, it's tone-lowering time again... I have Rubicon, which I enjoyed. But I also have Roman Sex. Although it only seems to confirm what I already knew or seriously suspected, it was still good to see it all in print! I find myself vindicated. Hehe - I always think it looks like a very cheeky sort of coffee-table book that should be left lying about to encourage conversation between guests. My history bookshelf is actually in the lounge, and it is amazing how many friends who turn up for parties or whatever study my shelves. Their eyes are always drawn to the deep bottom shelf and that book, but they don't dare to pick it up. Instead, after staring at it for a few moments, they turn to something harmless like The History of Lancashire or Manchester in the Victorian Age instead.... Next time, I swear I'm going to leave it out - and I do have a coffee table to put it on! I must make an attempt to acquire the Adkins and Adkins, however. As for military, I am not an afficionado by any stretch of the imagination, but I do still have an old, battered copy of Warfare in the Ancient World by John Warry that came free with one of those initial selections from an ancient history book club years ago. I think this book is highly under-rated - especially for beginners. The illustrations are wonderful, and the historical narrative acceptable, and my son has learned so much about the battles of the ancient world by constantly going back to this book through the years. He absolutely loves it.

I am bumping this thread because I was about to start a new one on the values of Suetonius, but sensibly did a search first - and hey presto! There was quite a bit of conversation here and there at our UK meet about Suetonius, and at one point I was having a little banter with Caldrail about this man whom I have always referred to as 'The Max Clifford of the Roman World'. (Clifford, for our US cousins, is a scurrilous journalist who made the Sun newspaper what it is - the National Enquirer with a busty girl on Page 3 and a bit of sports reporting on the back!). However, when I got back home I began to rethink all this, and I realise that there are things to be found in Suetonius that are not found anywhere else. Little facts or observations that are quite invaluable. Phil's post above singles out movie makers' and novelists' indebtedness to Suetonius, and it is easy to see the attraction. Where else, in our ancient sources, for instance, are we told that Augustus had blond hair? Or that he was 5'7" tall? Or that Caligula was very tall? Now, none of these things are scurrilous, but to a dramatist or novelist they are like gold-dust. Serious historians such as Tacitus, Dio etc. would not consider it important to record the habits of their subjects or their appearance, but it is precisely these little details that bring the man of history alive for the reader. In this regard, even the gossip is invaluable. Let it be true or false it was obviously accepted as gossip, and at least gives us a view of what Suetonius' readers would accept as titillating little anecdotes, or horrifying scandal. Phil also singled out above the age-old preoccupation of the anti-Tiberian camp with that emperor's 'spintrii', while in Augustus' biography, by comparison, Suetonius mentions him enjoying the company of little boys quite innocently! However - I mention this only as a difference in treatment - let us not go down that road again.... I think the reason we are still loathe to renounce our 'Tranquillus' is precisely because he brings the characters alive for us, as a biographer should. For more serious treatment of a period, however, I should think that most serious students would turn to other sources eventually, if only to check whether they corroborate him. Any more thoughts to add, anyone? Especially our newer members?

You shall not only dare, you absolutely must. Personally, I'd be for the Wall, but would be equally as happy to go south if that took the vote.

I have to confess to heresy here, Nephele. I have never seen The Caesars - just excerpts from it on various compilation programmes. I have to say, it looked excellent for its time, and I am still promising myself the DVDs. So, unfortunately I can make no useful comment here, other than to say that everything I've read on the Forum about this earlier series is very positive. Interesting point about Kevin Stoney repeating his Thrasyllus. Can't say I'm surprised - the part seems made for him. (And now you have just added another purchase to my Amazon basket for next month!)

What idiots! But as we're in Iceni territory, there may well be the ghost of THAT woman looking down with joy at this destruction.

I'm typing up my notes in Word as instructed by our esteemed Pertinax, but I just wanted to add my initial comments on the weekend here. This was a fantastic outing and I never felt any awkwardness at any stage - as all our members were like friends I'd known for ages. The weather was beautiful, the location was beautiful, the beer was beautiful! Like Neil I was sad to leave - especially as I had to dash off earlier than I'd hoped in the end and missed a final farewell with all my new friends. I do hope we can repeat this and invite even more members, and I hope our little 'York' band keep in touch. And a personal note to add that the future of our forum and Roman history in general is in very good hands in the person of Wotwotius. Our Wot came straight from the train to join us on our lengthy perambulation of the walls and contributed to all discussions without even breaking step. A great time was had by all. Thanks again, all.

I am noticing that if we post quickly, one after the other, quoting earlier posters in a thread, the interface now shows us two posts instead of the one as it used to. This is not a complaint at all - I just mention it as a difference from the old style. Is there a software reason for it?

Yes, I agree with you, DF. There do seem to be two layers here. I do love Grant - and he's become as comfortable as an old pair of slippers to me. Syme does still remain my own favourite for in-depth study of 'my' period - but I am always grateful to Grant for intoroducing me to other eras. As for Mommsen, strange as it may seem I have only very recently managed to 'obtain' him via the Gutenberg Project, and I have not yet digested enough of him to form a useful opinion.

Millar is outstanding. I was just reading his latest book yesterday, 'A Greek Roman Empire : power and belief under Theodosius II (408-450)'. It's excellent, obviously Indeed, I was very impressed with his 'Crowd in Rome' - but as this is the only work of his I have read so far, I did not feel able to comment on him fully. However, I found that while I loved his prose (again, he has an easy style while still retaining a great depth of academic research), that particular work only endorsed beliefs I had held before, and some time ago. But I do intend to read more of Millar.

I would agree wholeheartedly, GPM. I think I still possess more books by Grant than by any other single author, and I've even recentlly got a copy of his The Antonines. I will never grow out of him, and I know he will never let me down. His passing was greatly mourned.

Hmmm, let's look at the a little more of the passage in Latin and English and see what we can come up with. I have highlighted the key words in both as addressed in your post above: nisi dictum quod diceret te dixisse, laudandum adolescentem, ornandum, tollendum; se non esse commissurum, ut tolli posset. except as to a remark which he attributed to you: "the young man must be praised, honored, and immortalized." He said that he had no intention of letting himself got rid of. In the Latin differnt forms of the verb tollere (tollendum and tolli ) have been used for both which can mean: lift, raise; destroy; remove, steal; take/lift up/away. You don't usually see tollere used with the more negative definitions (raise; destroy; remove, steal) yet they are valid so it does make interesting wordplay. Perhaps you could use "Lifted up" which can be interpeted as "Lifted up in praise" or "lifted up and disposed of". So maybe like this: except as to a remark which he attributed to you: "the young man must be praised, honored, and lifted up." He said that he had no intention of letting himself get "lifted up". I'll knock this around a little more and see what I can come up with. I find this absolutely fascinating - and doesn't it sum up Cicero's wit and clever wordplay in a nutshell? Thank you PNS for highlighting this ambiguity in the way the two words are used, for I think it renders the double-entendre that would have had far more literary/verbal impact in Roman times - sort of a clever bon mot. On a lighter note - perhaps Cicero should have definitely left it as 'immortalised' - posterity would have claimed him as a prophet!

Good grief, this is a tough one - but as its personal opinion.... Most people on the Forum will know that I am still quite an avid fan of Ronald Syme. His prose style is somwhat dry, to be sure, but he attacks the facts and presents his theses in a persuasive way. He is heavily academic, however, so he's not one to tackle until a more general author has been consumed, IMHO. If you are looking for someone who writes in a lighter style and combines scholarly interpretation with engaging prose, try Michael Grant. He manages to convey much accurate information without theorising too much and he has a little of the 'story-teller' about him. For a much more modern treatment, try Tom Holland's Rubicon. He brings the vivid flair of the novel-writer to his work and his easy-flowing style masks some heavy scholarly research underneath. Although, I have to say that I enjoyed his Persian Fire more than his Rubicon, but that was perhaps because I knew less about the facts of the Persian Wars than I did about the fall of the Republic, so it was enjoyable and instructive to read the book. However, I am a Brit, and the three above are also Brits. I am not yet totally au fait with the more modern American authors, but I am sure our member Marcus Porcious Cato will give you more examples. I confess to not having read Everitt or Goldsworthy - something I must rectify before too long. You could also try visiting the Libri sub-forum for recommendations on Roman historians. And welcome to the Forum, BTW, Mikeal.

All joking apart, I wish our Nephele could join us! But don't worry - I know she'll be with us in spirit(s). I think a special photo will be called for, in which we are all toasting her health and infectious wackiness.

Providing the OU is still the same, I can recommend it, Neil. It is a while ago since I studied with them personally and I can remember it being very expensive, but as I was working for a University Press at the time, I got quite a few components paid by my employers. The only thing I wasn't too keen on was the fact that I couldn't do an entire Classical Studies degree at the time - I had to do a combination of Classics, non-classical history and English Lit - whereas it does seem to be a bit more structured now. I did mine as pure self-indulgence, for love of the subjects concerned - but I do wish I'd listened to my old Classics master and gone straight from school. But we know it all when we're 18, don't we? The OU does seem, however, to offer what - say - the American uni's offer - i.e. a 'major' and 'minor' as you state above. So, if I were to class myself, I suppose I'd say, History 'major' with English 'minor'. I have recently examined the possibility of a straight Classical Studies degree (again for pure self-indulgence) but as it would cost me

I have to say, Bryaxis - that with a real name as lovely as Pascal Lemaire, you do not need another!

I've waited over a week to post this comment - so I am NOT going to give it up lightly Thank you Firefox! I just wanted to say that Everitt's view here is not a new one. This very same reasoning behind Augustus' curbing of manumissions was expounded in the first edition of the Cambridge Ancient History, Vol X way back in the 30s. I quote from the article by Hugh Last in CAH, X (Cambridge 1934) Distinct from the problem presented by domestic manumission with which the Lex Junia had to deal, was the threat made to the character of the Roman People by the numbers in which slaves were set free by the full procedure which converted them forthwith into Roman citizens....Augustus fixed limits to the reckless generosity with which masters freed their slaves by will. [The Lex Fufia Caninia] countered this with an arrangement whereby the number of slaves a master might liberate by will was limited to a stated fraction of the number which he owned, and this fraction diminished as the size of the familia increased.....Thus one of the broadest channels by which foreign blood flowed into the community of Roman citizens was so far dammed as to leave its stream of manageable dimensions, with consequences of which the value may be gathered from the care which was taken to prevent their frustration. Augustus further introduced the Lex Aelia Sentia, which, as we know, also curbed manumissions by masters during their lifetimes, with exactly the same aim in mind. The earlier measure [i.e. the Lex Fufia Caninia] had brought testamentary manumission under control: the Lex Aelia Sentia curbed manumission during the lifetime of the owner: and together these laws cannot have failed to secure a drastic reduction in the number of persons alien both by culture and by blood, whom the body politic of Rome was called upon to absorb. I have to say that this was always the argument I 'grew up with' regarding Augustus' manumission policy.

Thanks for this tip, Moon. After nearly parting with a lot of cash to buy a new machine, I decided just to try downloading the Firefox - and fingers crossed, things seem to have settled! I had thought that my hard drive was starting to die, but the browser did only ever crash when in certain threads of UNRV, so I'll keep cheerful and plod on for a while. - Thanks again - you are a star.

Well, he kept that one quiet! At least Gaius Paulinus admits to his vices in public! Yes - it's great news that Wot will be joining us - he'll be a great addition to our merry band and will probably keep us all in check. BTW: Do we have a dress code? I assuming for trudging around on our journeys jeans and sensible footwear will be adequate? I was going to bring all my Armani and Gucci - but I've decided against it...

Hehe - I'll have you know that two seasons ago when we were knocked out of the Cup by Newcastle (that terrible Monty Pythonesque tie that ended with 9 Chels players on the field and 8 of them limping!) I was supporting the Toon wholeheartedly afterwards to lift the Cup. And who are you calling a southerner? Look forward to meeting you, Neil. We should all have some fun at the weekend. And on a more serious note - what time is everyone arriving - those who are gathering for the Friday night? I shall be checking into my little guest house at about 5.30pm.

And on this same note, Neil - anything by Tchaikovsky - who is a composer most people grow out of when they are 16! Nice tunes, Pyotr - but come on - really.... It's all so self-indulgent!

Hey, husband - whisky is fine! I have ear-marked some money for this weekend, so I won't stint anyone. And after all, I am the Augusta! Plus, I'm one of those lasses who believes in paying her way. As for our Gaius Paulinus - before we castigate his missus too much, let us all remember that she took him away to Rome for his 30th. She sounds like an OK gal to me - so we can allow her a little soiree at the shops! Just don't spend too much of his money, Mrs. Gaius! I am really looking forward to this weekend myself. It should be great fun and informative into the bargain. And bear in mind, I am forgoing the FA Cup semi final versus Blackburn! You sound like a very independant young lady. I will be deeply honoured to meet the Augusta!! I probably sounded a tad sexist when I said of Mrs Gaius that her hubby could sneak away from the shops!! Nothing intended though!. I'm sure they will have a great day and we will look forward to his/their company next time. Breakfast in bed... now that's a lovely thought!! Mind after a night on the tiles he'll be too knackered to get out of bed!!! So have a great day Gaius and look after your missus... Hey Augusta - does this mean you are a Chelsea fan? Never mind... someone has to do it!! I would like to see a couple of seasons with all teams having like for like players and we'll see who comes out on top then. Money wins trophies - well, that's the theory!! We have money but it gets spent poorly and we have a bare cabinet since '69... who are we? Newcastle United!! Great club, best fans in the country, most passion, some crap players and a chairman who used to be a scrap metal merchant!!! Well, still is but his 'passion' is touting his position as NUFC chairman!! He's a loony to most Geordies!!!! Who'll win the Cup? Man. Utd. And I hate saying that coz I don't like any of Arsenal, Man Utd or Chelsea. It's the whole thing about Arsenal from their boss down who is blind to anything he doesn't want to see even if it smacks him in the face!!. I don't Ferguson at man Utd - apart from that they're not too bad!!! Chelsea? Arrogant, big-headed and can only win things when backed by big money. Their boss? Self opinionated but confident. Anyway... let's talk all things Roman in York and we'll think of you Gaius and have a pint for you no doubt. Will we be praying to any Gods after a few jars? If so, which ones? Concerning this entire post I have two comments, Augustus! Firstly - you flatter me to call me a young lady. But that is not important. As for the football chat - I look forward to a long talk with you.... As for NUFC - I have always had a soft spot - and how dare you say they have rubbish players when we sold you Scott Parker? All right - I know we're guilty of selling you Baba as well, but come on... Hehe, I look forward to meeting you.... I really cannot let you get away with your comments about the second greatest love of my life - the Chels! I'll explain why when we meet.... It's been 38 years of love for me... Are we all getting a little excited and happy about this meet? There should be plenty of opportunity for fun as well as serious Roman discussion.