Maladict

Obey the rules, people Mosquito had the correct answer first, and gets to post the next picture.

This is a little game I stole from another site, modified for our common interest. I'm not sure if this forum has enough active members to pull it off, but we'll see. Basically, a member posts a picture of (part of) an ancient city and everyone has to guess its name. Whoever gets it right posts the next one, et cetera. Rules: - Geographic limits are the Greek and Roman world and its direct neighbours. (no India, China, Americas etc.) - The picture has to contain something from the city that makes it recognisable, but that doesn't mean it can't be hard to spot. - Wait for the original poster to confirm the correct answer before posting a new picture. - If the original poster fails to do so for a long time confirmation by displaying some kind of proof is acceptable. - No hotlinks, they usually give away the answer. Download the picture you wish to use, rename it and upload it to an image hosting site. - Use of search engines is allowed. Allright, here we go:

It may not have looked all that different; the last recorded games took place in 550.

Interestingly, Basilius was a westerner, and probably served his consular year in Rome, not Constantinople. He did take the ceremony at Constantinople, though. As for what happened after 541, Justinian did not take the consulship himself after 541, and neither did anyone else. Justin II took it on his accession (566), and it was still in use during the reign of Constans II, who became consul in 642.

No, to be honest I don't think it is. First off, the subject is too big to handle in a single paper if you want it to have any depth. Secondly, you won't be able to make an overly convincing case (you won't be able to 'proof it'). Though scholars from Gibbon to the present have been arguing in support of 'your' hypothesis, it is at present not widely accepted. In current research the adoption of Christianity is generally being downplayed as a reason for the collapse of the western empire. If you intend to pursue this question, by all means go ahead, but expect an uphill struggle, and a vast body of literature to work with. Quoting Gibbon just won't do anymore.

Yeah perhaps, but he seemed to take the statistics approach seriously. It's an interesting piece, regardless. And yes I'm wasting my time, should be putting it into my thesis (thesis > essay, sorry)

And when you contacted the statistician involved in the project, what exactly did he tell you? He has finally answered : Wall Street Journal I'm going to take a risk and say that article will never be published by a major journal.

That's primarily what I meant by seedy. They were just pushed down the road a bit, beyond the point where most tourists give up and turn back.

Never heard those stories, though it's probably wise not to wander around after dark. I've heard there's a seedy part near the airport (Ciampino), but I've never been there myself.

But that won't save you from getting drowned (and quite possibly run over) by traffic. The first kilometer is quite the disappointment; then it gets better for a 5km stretch; then back to heavy traffic all the way to Terracina. You really don't want to walk there. Follow the old road through the mountains and you'll have a blast, and pick up the Appia from Capua instead.

I bet you 5 internet dollars you'll change your mind after the first kilometer.

My Latin is pretty bad, but (viri) spectabilis is a title and should probably left in its Latin form. The spectabilate was the middle senatorial class of the late empire. (illustrate - spectabilate - clarissimate). You'll find a lot of references in Symmachus to "illustrious" men, but those, too, are just titles.

I don't know, they already had Constantine's lance. Maxentius just won't do

It could have been preserved quite well, if the conditions were dry enough. In Rome, however, that could be a problem.

Good pictures, if a bit old. It's still housed in the ugly old museum, not that the new one is particularly attractive.

That won't give a result that's accurate enough, there's usually a range of a few decades at least. There's not much to radiocarbon date anyway, except the silk wrapping perhaps.

No written records or inscriptions, the attribution is based on the fact that Maxentius was the only emperor who resided at Rome in the period apparently attributed to the place/layer the sceptre was found in. Maxentius did some major (re)building on the Palatine, which perhaps could be connected to the find.

Looks like a good site, but that wouldn't work for me. The main advantage of Babylon is that you get to store the dictionaries on your hard drive. You're not dependent on internet access.

Even if the audience may not know a lot about the empire, they probably will know about the 'hollywood-version'. No need to tell them anecdotes about the depraved emperors, gladiators etc. They already know this, and you'll only be perpetuating the stereotypes. Use your time to tell them something they don't know. For instance, focus on a period they won't be familiar with, such as the third century, or the fifth. Avoid the obvious (What was the Roman legacy, why did Rome fall/rise), you won't have the time to deal with such broad topics anyway. Instead, leave them a single, well-made point that changes their perception of Rome, if only just a little. That's what will make them want to know more.

It's pretty good,actually. Especially the premium dictionaries, but I believe they make you pay even more for them.

Depends on the quality of the data. If it's not sufficient, I wouldn't waste my time. I have no issue with the calculations per se, just interested what they're based on.

I asked him to let me see his source data, but he wouldn't let me.

And none of the leading archaeological journals. You realize these statistics are based on guesses, right? There are no accurate figures for the demographics of the region at that time.

Yet still high enough to keep any sane person from declaring it the tomb of Jesus on that basis alone.

Why is this even an issue? The discovery was made at least a decade ago and the inscriptions were duly noted, and dismissed by professional archaeologists. Unless new information has turned up, this should be the end of the story.