The Augusta

Hey - Maladict - that image was one of the ones I've been studying - that very ram. The plated bit with the holes is that part that would have fit over the jutting prow of the ship at the water line (if I've got that nautical term correct - boats are a mystery to me!), but I think the chunky bit at the end - the actual ram - would be more or less solid. And isn't this the very ram that is supposed to weigh 1-2 tons? Even if it were completely hollow, I still couldn't see a nail getting through the chunky bit (which was the bit projecting from the facade of the Rostra). Thanks for going to the trouble of finding it, but as you may have read in my comment above, I have managed to solve this problem now. MPC planted a seed, and as I'm using just one hand (the right), I know what I'm going to do with it, so nails will not be necessary after all. Sorry to have troubled you all with this, but it just goes to show that we can be happily going along with all the history and the research in our heads and then - Bang! - a simple technicality like this comes up.

That's a clever solution to the local problem, but then the rams would have been nearly useless for crushing quinquiremes, which was their original intent. What's the reason to think that the hands of Cicero were independently affixed? Seems to me a more tidy solution would be to tie up the hands with string and affix them to the head, which could be impaled rather properly onto anything sharp and pointy. In fact, if you don't do that, it's not clear exactly whose hands they are, which rather defeats the point. OK, now I need a shower.... this era in Roman history is disgusting. Thanks, both - and especially to MPC, who must have had to grit his teeth when writing! It is a particularly disgusting time, and that is exactly what I want to convey. I agree with MPC that bronze clad rams would not have been much use is actual ramming, and we do know that the rams that decorated the rostra were captured from actual battles. I have used a form of impaling for the head (sorry, MPC) but you have now given me a very wonderful idea for what to do with the hand(s) - although I have gone with the sources who claim it was only the right hand here, which simplifies things for me. I will not induce any further nausea by forcing this upon you any further, but please accept my thanks for solving what had become a nitty problem.

Hi everyone - I need the help of all our Roman technos. In reducing the hefty word count on my novel before it starts doing the rounds of agents, I have cut out the former beginning of the book and restarted the entire story from the moment of the Proscriptions. Now, I'm sorry to say this, MPC, but the first chapter deals with the nailing up of Cicero's head and hand on the Rostra. (I thought this would be a good image to symbolise the end of liberty etc.) But I've run into a very, very technical problem. Because I want to describe this event in its entirety, I need to know just how the hand would have been fixed! (I have worked out a particularly gruesome fate for his poor head, which I will not describe here, but I'm sure it would work.) I've not chosen this beginning for any gratuitous reason; I want to hit the reader immediately with the terror that swept down onto the nobility. My problem is this: The ships' rams on the Rostra were made of bronze. The facade of the Rostra was made of tufa and other stone dressed with some marble. How do you nail to bronze? I'm sure it can't be done, or can it? I've researched the old rostra and where the beaks were placed etc, but I can't for the life of me understand just how something could be 'nailed' to the rams. Surely, nailing something implies that some of the structure was wood, or other such material. So, does anyone have any suggestions as to how something as small as a hand could be nailed or fixed to the rams without the presence of some kind of wooden supporting structure. I will be forever in your debt.

And I've just got back from the match! Yep - a very good birthday present. And then I log in here and read all your good wishes. Thank you everyone. I'm only on coffee at the moment after a long train journey home, but I'll be cracking open the real stuff very shortly.

Thank you, Lucius - I don't believe we've 'met'. I love your signature quote from Seneca!

Thank you, dear friends. Wine is flowing. I'l be thinking of you all.

Loved it. I haven't been following the US election fiasco, I'm afraid, but this did not detract from my appreciation of this amusing piece. Good find, MPC!

Hi, I think the first scholar who tried to rescue Gaius from the malignant tradition was Professor J.V. Balsdon in The Emperor Gaius. Although the book is somewhat dated now (1934) and I think out of print (I have a copy on my shelves) you may be able to pick up a second hand copy somewhere. I've just had a scout around the Net and there are places selling ex-library copies. Balsdon's thesis sounds to be exactly what you are looking for. Alas, if you can't get hold of this, you could try the Anthony Barrett biography Caligula: The Corruption of Power (1989), which is readily available at Amazon, and follows a similar line to Balsdon. Barrett is accessible and writes a lively prose. He also gives an extensive bibliography and sources, so he may well serve your purposes. Other members may have other suggestions. Hope this helps and welcome to the Forum.

Vibs, have you visited the Absolute Write forum? I spent a bit of time lurking and was so impressed that I've registered. I'm only a newbie there at the mo, with about twenty-odd posts in a couple of days, but I can highly recommend it. (My user name there is Clio). I can't post the link, as mine is short-cutted on a log-in for a member, so just Google 'Absolute Write' and you'll find what you need. But you could also give http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/ a try; it should bring up a box for registration. If you are serious about your writing, I would suggest you join a forum such as this. There are some very knowledgeable people there - and not a few published authors. For our purposes, Scott Oden is a regular member. You don't have to be savaged (a lot of these places can be bitchy, I know). If you want to put your work up for crit, you can ask for 'kind' comments only and the like. The members range in age and there are plenty who are young, just starting out, so give it a go. It is a massive forum (probably larger than UNRV) and you should find lots of help when reading through some of the old threads there. There is a full section for historical fiction.

Indeed - and don't forget that letters could also be written on wax tablets - a diptych tied with string. This may have been a cheaper solution for the less wealthy, as the recipient could write his reply on the same tablet and send it back with the same messenger. Another thing to consider is the possibility of a messenger memorising a verbal message too. This was not unheard of.

Thanks for that, Publius. I think Dimwits and Religion mix perfectly! As for me - I'll take the XBox 360 everytime. It may not be able to walk on water, but boy, does it bring joy!

"The next thing I noticed was a warm wetness on my trouser leg. Fido was here." This brings me nicely to a joke told to me by a friendly taxi-driver. What is the difference between a poodle peeing down your leg and a Rottweiler peeing down your leg? You let the Rottweiler finish. Well, I quite liked it...

Semi-colon versus comma usage is something that is gained more by experience than anything else, Vibs - so I wouldn't worry too much about it. In fact, the usage has changed over the years. In the past, where grammar books would insist on a strict semi-colon, a comma is now all that is required. If you put your grammar checker on Word, it will probably pick up the semi-colon/comma usage for you. But as a general rule, if a sentence contains two main clauses side by side, that could feasibly stand alone, a semi-colon is used rather than a comma. Semi-colons are also used for 'listing' things. In your extract above: "Shrines and temples were filled with boisterous men cheering and jeering as animals were sacrificed. Vibius glimpsed the tavern, it was alive with energy. " I would use a semi-colon here, but I think you could probably get away with a comma. In fact, one could also use a full colon! (Just to confuse you further- lol) "The tavern was bursting with life. Men from all backgrounds were merrily chanting or drinking. A Roman soldier and a peasant sat side by side gulping from two large urns, both were sloshing the red liquid about them." Again, I would use a semi-colon, but as I said in my previous post, this is quite pedantic of me. Seriously, Vibs - don't worry about it. I doubt your teacher in school would mark you down on such a thing as this. Again, one way to check the usage is to see it used by your favourite authors. You'll soon pick up the knack, and it will become natural.

Are you joking LW? If I saw a woman with an Adam's Apple like that, I'd be looking under her dress!

And has no one noticed how interactive Autumn has become this year? It wishes to announce its dreary wet presence on an intimate level. On Monday, I went to lunch late, and Autumn knew it! It was so filled with artificial intelligence that it nodded to the skies at the exact moment I was walking up to Sainsbury's in Hazel Grove. The result was a drenched, cold, shivering medical secretary who swore a lot. I thought I could defy the little devil by putting off my journey home for an hour. Whilst I was on the bus, Autumn behaved itself, painting the dusk with gold and all sorts of anthropomorphic nonsense. But as soon as my foot alighted in Manchester, the heavens lowered and a deluge ensued. The result was a very wet, and by this stage, tired medical secretary, who swore even more. Today, I was clever. I took an umbrella. Autumn, however, decided to sport with me by employing gusts of wind, thus countering my little unilateral tortoise formation. The result.... yes, you've guessed it. And it used to be such a nice season - ask John Keats!

Nephele - do you think the dropping of the adoptive 'ianus' was in part influenced by Augustus himself, who had jettisoned his 'Octavianus'? After all, it is only history who refers to him as 'Octavian'. The name was not part of his official nomenclature, even during the triumviral years. The primary sources refer to him as 'Caesar'. I just wonder whether in ancient Rome, as was sometimes the case in Victorian England, the general population emulated the naming practices of the rulership. Just a thought to throw in the pot. You may have better ideas. As to 'Sejanus' not being an adoptive cognomen - again, I bow to your greater wisdom in these matters, but to me this seems to be exactly the adoptive form of 'Sejus' or 'Seius'. Surely the Latin would have ignored the double vowel, thus changing 'Seiianus' to Seianus' - or 'Sejanus', as we know him? Strike the above, Neph - I think I've misread your last para - you are referring to Pliny, of course, and not Sejanus.

Hmm. This may have been more to do with the Imperial family name, Ingsoc, rather than the general norm. Tiberius is perhaps not a good example. Compare Sejanus, who, as the son of Seius Strabo, and adopted by a man named Aelius, still retained his 'Sejanus' - by which history itself knows him.

A fascinating topic, Nephele. Without scouring the histories, the one man who immediately springs to mind for me is Sextus Pompeius. Whilst he clearly fell woefully short of the achievements of his father, he nevertheless seemed determined to make some sort of stand against the Second Triumvirate. His reluctance to move when he could have done (41BC, for instance) suggests, to me, that he was trying to live up to his father's name, without really having the drive to do it properly. I have often wondered if the crushing weight of his family name coloured his decisions.

I'm not quite sure about this, NN. For every viewer like your work colleague who has been prompted to pursue a more in-depth study of the period, you will have twenty like my daughter - who watches series like this to ogle Simon Woods or that chap in the Tudors. Soap is soap, complete with its audience. I think it is somewhat hopeful to number converts to Roman history in terms of a hundred thousand! But I take your point, nonetheless.

He was indeed a popular figure, but can you point to a lasting achievement? Well, I can think of the one thing that Germanicus left to the Roman World - Caligula!

May I commit heresy here? We visited Arbeia on our recent Hadrian's Wall trip in July, and I have to say, of the four forts we visited, I found Arbeia to be the most disappointing. To anyone who has seen the preserved frescoes of Pompeii, Rome itself, or Livia's villa at Prima Porta, the reconstructions were tawdry and shabby to say the least. Whilst I appreciate the difficulties in matching ancient colours with modern pigments, I really did cringe at the crude representations at Arbeia. I also found the eclectic nature of the reconstructions to be something of a problem. We had Third and Second Style Roman wall paintings set in a 2nd century AD setting. All in all, a big turn-off for me, I'm afraid. Sometimes, it is perhaps better to leave the ruins as they are and let imagination supply the missing fragments.

A very good point - and this probably deserves its own thread. We have to remember that Shakespeare wrote for the Elizabethan court. Whatever he may or may not have thought about Julius Caesar, one could not put on a play before a monarch that rejoiced in the downfall of another! This needs to be borne in mind in any discussion of Shakepeare's 'Histories'.

As an aside to you, Decimus, I can state here and now that there are two BBC series that I can watch, re-watch and re-watch, without ever getting fed-up. One is the incomparable 'Claudius'; the other is 'Tenko'. The latter is a girls' thing, so you may not have had the pleasure (but I'll bet your mum watched it!), but it is cast in a similar mould: characters you would die for, or love to hate/love - whatever. That, for me, is the top and bottom of it. I don't need big budget sets - I just want something that lives in the mind. It's in the writing and acting. If these are good enough, a studio set can become ancient Rome or a Japanese camp. Theatre (even on TV) is a two-way process; the audience is an essential part of it. Engage the audience and you have a classic.

I think my views are well known - LOL. I did watch the first season twice through, but I have so far not even attempted a second viewing of Series 2. However, my daughter does want the entire thing for Christmas, so I may take the plunge then. I sent my DVDs of the first series to a good home, and did not part with hard-earned cash for the second, but it seems that I will have to now, to keep the offspring quiet. To sum up, I really felt that the whole thing fell between two fires and failed because of it. Had they kept to the fictional nucleus of Vorenus and Pullo it would have worked. Had they kept to the history of the turmoil of the 40s BC it would have worked. Bringing the two together, seemed to be a bit beyond the capabilities of the writers and directors. As a drama, for me, it failed. But there were some glittering moments, nonetheless, and I will never, ever, forget Purefoy's Antony and Bamber's Cicero.