Primus Pilus

I think its important to understand that Caesar was a great man who filled a gap in history perfectly. If not for Caesar, Rome would've followed a similar, yet decidedly alternate path. Some conjecture... Without Caesar, Crassus and Pompey would've never become reluctant allies. They very well may have developed a rivalry far more serious than it already was. Was civil war inevitable? Maybe not. Without Caesar's campaigns in Gaul perhaps Crassus didn't need to seek glory in Parthia. But I am getting too far ahead. Without Caesar, Pompey's veterans probably never get settled. What does Pompey do with an large army that the Senate refuses to grant retirement benefits? Perhaps Pompey becomes another Sulla. Perhaps men like Clodius become even more dangerous, though I doubt that a tribune demigod could ever have been more than a major disturbance. Cato, without Caesar to thwart him, may have developed truly into the greatest Republican statesmen ever, and saved the Republic. However, I doubt it. In the late Republic statesmenship never won, the men best generals and the best armies did. Alas, the Republic was doomed with or without Caesar.

The decisions are made... but... just waiting for the pages to be ready for publishing, so we can announce the winners and let everyone read all the entries at the same time. Edit: I have been informed that we will be ready tomorrow (Thursday)

If I read the poll literally, I must use Spartacus, as he is the only one who truly defied Roman authority. The others were foreign kings who owed no allegience to Rome.

Killing Hannibal would've ended any hope/fear of his return to power. It may have actually helped to unify more quickly than actually happened. Perhaps Antiochus III may not have been so emboldened to risk war with Rome had Hannibal already been dead. (Though all evidence suggests he really wasn't much more than afterthought to the Seleucids).

Quite simply... VENI, VIDI, VICI

According to one perspective. Really, while this debate rages on in countless formats and in countless places, it really always ends up back at square one. Whether one 'believes it or not'. The 'truth' is debatable on many levels, whether it be the Christian origin of Jesus, other 'non belief' arguments, or this Jesus is Caesar angle. Its a never ending circle of repetitive argument really.

Has anyone seen a preview yet... I've been watching diligently and no luck yet. I have heard a short preview has been released though.

You are a superior zombie killer. I only scored 78%. Perhaps I wasted too much time saving those people... even though I certainly wouldn't take them with me

To the flaming poster... your posts have been deleted and your user name banned. Discussion and debate are welcomed, but obvious flame baits will be deleted and obscene or inflammatory user names removed.

Hello Amy and welcome. We'd certainly like to see anything you might be willing to share.

Judging is difficult... but there are some excellent entries. Thanks to all those who participated. We will do our best to get some results very soon In the meantime here is some prize info... Books Legion signed by Bill Altimari (MATT) Lion's Brood signed by Rafael Scott (LEE) The Last King by Michael Curtis Ford (MATT) Imperial Governor by George Shipway (SPURIUS) Hannibal by Ernle Bradford (JASON) A Pocket Guide: Roman Wales by William Manning (JUG) Coins: Commodus Provincial AE 177 - 192 AD Minted under Caecilius Maternus Obv. AVT KAI AVP KOMODOC Rev. HGE MATTERNOV NIKOPOL PROCI (MATT) Gordian III Antoninianus Obverse Gordian Reverse 238 - 244 AD Obv. IMP GORDIANVS PIVS FEL AVG (radiate head of Gordian) Rev. FORT REDVX (Fortuna seated. Coin refers to departure for the Persian War) (SPURIUS) Aurelian Antoninianus Obverse Aurelian Reverse 270 - 275 AD Obv. IMP AVRELIANVS AVG (Aurelian radiate crown) Rev. CONCORDIA MILITVM (Aurelian and Concordia clasping hands) (LEE) Constantine AE 4 Obverse Constantine Reverse 307 - 337 AD Obv. DV CONSTANTINVS PF AVG (veiled head of Constantine) Rev. VN MR (Constantine Standing) Posthumous issue celebrating the life of Constantine (JASON) Valens AE3 Obverse Valens Reverse 364 - 378 AD Obv. DN VALENS PF AVG (Valens) Rev. GLORIA ROMANORVM (Emperor walking holding labarum and dragging a captive) (MATT) Commodus Denarius Obverse Commodius Reverse 177 - 192 AD Obv. M COMM ANT P FEL AVG BRIT PP (Commodus laureate head) Rev. ROM FEL PM TR P XVI COS VI (Roma seated, holding victory and spear, shield by her side) (JUG)

Although women did enjoy more minor freedoms than in many other contemporary cultures. Socially, they were allowed many indulgences, it was the economic and political paths that were denied. Even still, there are known cases of women owning businesses and many managed their own households with complete authority. Obviously too, certain women of tremendous character could influence their men in political positions. Livia is a perfect example I think. However, the growth of Christianity is one piece of proof that women didn't enjoy great freedom in Roman society. Its overwhelming popularity with people of the lowest social orders (which included women in great numbers), shows that they did indeed occupy a rather limited place in Roman society.

Welcome Dogmatix... alas, the Romans weren't too fond of beer, but rest assured that at least one person who studies ancient history, very much loves the stuff

Grant has written an unbelievable number of books. Clodius is one of the most interesting characters in a time period filled with amazing personalities.

Thats the beautiful thing about religion or faith. Proof is not the necessity, it simply requires belief. One cannot prove or disprove the gospels any more than one can prove or disprove the writings of Livy. Despite my noted lack of the afore-mentioned 'belief' I still agree with Marcus Regulus that Caesar and Jesus are clearly different people.

And the US system doesnt need 'Tribunes', because the Executive (President) and legislative (Senate and House) can effectively veto by various forms of political manipulation. Simple design, yet its evolved into ridiculous complexity. Perhaps a Tribune would help.

The active legions left, but many people who had 'settled' certainly stayed behind. That would include large communities of retired legionaries, their local 'mixed' families, and other immigrants from all over the Empire. Add Anglos, Saxons, Norse Vikings and other Germanics to a diverse pre-existing population of many varieties of tribal Celts, Romans, Sarmatians, etc., and Britain is truly an early form of the 'melting pot'.

What was the point? LOL, ok ok, moving this to after hours.

You are not convinced that Vandals, Huns, Goths, etc. were overrunning the western empire?

I guess its sort of hard to find, you're not the first person to ask... The Bibliography. The list is out of date, but the great bulk of my resource material comes from the ancient sources. While I use ideas of more contemporary historians, the material within UNRV.com is heavily influenced by my own personal interpretations.

LOL thanks for that one

Much of the US national monuments are based on Roman architecture. I think thats the point he'd trying to make.

It was in the admin structure Skenderbeg. Because we had it set to 0, forum members weren't allowed upload files.

And of course, a late imperial provincial emperor from Britannia... Bennius Hillius. His sexual depravity rivaled Caligula.

Sometimes I think we look at ancient battles with too much of a modern approach. Battles at that point in world history, especially for Rome, were almost always fought head on, center to center. Hannibal's brilliance is that he recognized and took full advantage of this Roman weakness. He exploited the inability of his enemy to adapt, and with far fewer men, destroyed one army after another. It might seem simple to us now... here come the Romans straight at us... lets flank them... even though its so obvious, but it is more than that. Hannibal had an uncanny ability to lead his enemies into perfectly laid traps. One can argue that he just kept outsmarting an overzealous enemy that kept coming at him, but isn't Robert E. Lee considered just as brilliant for doing that very same thing in the American Civil War. Because of Hannibal, Scipio reformed the way the legions worked. While there was still considerable time before they would become the professional armies after Marius, no longer were they left to be part time citizen soldiers who weren't well trained or experienced enough to perform more complex maneuvers than marching straight at the enemy. Because of Hannibal, Rome had to shift its military approach and become more adaptable in the field. In so doing, the legions evolved into the most formidable infantry the world has ever seen.