Primus Pilus

The icon of Rome's foundation, the Capitoline she-wolf, was crafted in the Middle Ages, not the Antiquities, according to a research into the statue

I use the Berlin mirror site... It's always seemed slightly faster to me. Perseus-Berlin

Ursus is speaking of the Roman belief in their cultural superiority that dictated its "imperialism". Whether it was right, wrong, moral, immoral or generally indifferent doesn't matter, because in its most simple terms it is laced with the truth. Did Rome have other reasons for invasion and conquering? Absolutely, and many have been recorded, but at their essence, Romans believed they were superior.

Nothing to be concerned over... I just don't think anyone is aware of such a list. I for one would find such a compilation interesting, but I'm afraid I can't offer you much in the way of support beyond the obvious research choices.

Corny or not, I'm thankful that this community is made up of the sort of people who would post such thoughts. Our intention was simply to have a place to discuss Roman history... I certainly never imagined I would've developed so many personal relationships in the pursuit of that discussion. Thanks to all.

There will be no monarch of the United States of America. If that were to happen, the afore-mentioned entity would cease to exist.

Will do! Your lucky tradition is on your city's side. Hold up a sign that says, 'FIRE MCMILLAN' then we'll know. Can you believe it..... they actually take the Fire Millen signs away from people. The claim is that the signs distract other people from watching the game, but nobody ever takes away a sign from some schmuck that says something to the effect of "I love the lions". Tyranny! (Especially @ $8 a beer)

Agreed. The 'I, Claudius' Tiberius is simply an ancillary character who helps establish Livia as a dominant force. There seems to be more Nero/Agrippina relationship in the Tiberius/Livia combination presented in I, Claudius. (imo, of course)

I want a book that is a primary source and that goes in-depth. I assume by primary that you don't actually mean the ancient sources such as Livy. If you do, the link provided should help get you started. The source material is scattered depending on what your focus is and only Cassius Dio provides a relatively complete narrative from beginning to end. (Livy's work follows roughly the foundations through the Punic/Macedonian Wars... or through the 2nd century BC.) I am getting the impression that you want a solid introductory, yet complete and intelligent overview. If this is the case I would concur with Cato's recommendation of Philip Matyzak's "Chronicle of the Roman Republic". Works by historians such as H.H. Scullard ("History of the Roman World: 753 to 146 BC" and "From the Gracchi to Nero") obviously meet the criteria as in depth but are hardly introductory. I've found Andrew Lintott's "The Constitution of the Roman Republic" to be an indispensable reference manual on the institutions and political systems of the Republic, but is hardly an all encompassing "history" per se (nor is it light fair). Another recommendation might be Michael Grant's "History of Rome". This is a general overview of Roman history including the imperial period, but still provides an excellent introduction to the Republic. Grant generally provides a re-interpretation narrative of ancient source materials in an easy style, so you aren't getting getting overwhelmed with new theories and/or over analyzed details.

Be sure to look for me in the crowd if any of you are unfortunate enough to watch the traditional (and embarrassing) Lion's game this Thanksgiving day. I'll be the drunk guy with the cloud of shame over my head. You know, it's bad enough that those of us in Detroit have been laden with such a pathetic excuse of a professional sport's team, but I'm also foolish enough to have been a season ticket holder for nigh on 15 years. Why couldn't American football be truly more like true Roman entertainment... by now our 'Lions' would've certainly been fed to the real lions.

I cut out the following ad via screen grab while browsing around in the Yahoo television listings...

Thanks. You have a point, but it still sounds like a defence of orthodoxy more than anything else. Romans may have thought that these areas were "officially annexed", whereas someone else - for instance the Parthians or the Sassanidae - may have though of them as officially belonging to themselves, with evidence on their side. If mere occupation during a hapless military campaign is enough, then a much greater part of Germany should also be shown as Roman, as it was occupied in early 1st C. Perhaps you will tell me that it was not "officially" occupied. I didn't say that anything was officially occupied or not. I said it was annexed. It is in writing. Whether or not the Parthians agreed or disagreed is not relevant. As I said, it may have been short term, but the record indicates that this was the extent of the official borders in AD 117. Additionally, a portion of Germania Magna was annexed between the Rhine and the Elbe Rivers. It was abandoned after the Teutoburg affair and the subsequent punitive campaigns of Germanicus of course, but it doesn't change the fact that it had been established as a governed territory for a short time. If you look on our map, you will see that we also clearly indicate that this portion of Germania was once part of the empire, but that in AD 117, it was not. In fact, if you were to see the actual printed version of our map, you would see that we clearly mark Mesopotamia and Assyria as only temporary expansion.

We often get requests or have various discussions on making costumes or authentic Roman clothing. While searching around for "Roman things to do" in the summer of 2007 (for our forum meetings), my memory was refreshed as to the wonderful guides that are already provided by some of the legionary re-enactment groups. From Legio XXIV Media Lorica (Armor) Corbridge A Segmentata Corbridge B Newstead Civilian Clothing From Legio XX: Handbook for Legionaries Civilian Clothing Some is the exact same as the above page but it offers additional information such as cold-weather clothing, things to avoid and other links. (And I'm not quite sure who is the original source so I'd figure I'd provide links to both legions.)

Yuengling's Seriously though, we should be keeping an eye out on the event page of Legio XXIV Media based in PA.

It's based upon the evidence at that particular moment in time. Rome controlled Mesopotamia and Armenia, albeit shortly, and it was thusly it's "Greatest Extent". Both provinces were officially annexed, and in fact continued under a state of disputed control through various moments in the course of history (Septimius Severus, Diocletion...) It has nothing to do with modern political connotations. [EDIT: I removed the images as they distorted the page layout... links are still there for anyone who cares.]

Not sure. Did they pre-date Bowie? He was the biggest influence for the glam rock revolution on this side of the Pond, but it may well have been a different source for you in the US. I'm not sure wat dates Kiss spanned - only that they were 70s. Then of course, there was Alice! We've forgotten him. Does he pre-date Kiss? Ah, this is so nostalgic..... Don't get me wrong here, I am not at all trying to suggest that there weren't earlier, bigger or better influences musically, but Kiss helped usher in the notion that the music didn't matter as long as there was a ridiculous display on stage to distract everyone's attention. What I am trying to say is that perhaps negative influence should be considered as well.

He's here. Ah, cheers, PP - I missed it. One of my senior moments..... You know, as I give the list a few more gloss-overs, I'm finding that it is actually quite good. There are still the omissions based on various tastes, and over representations of some bands, but I suppose "influence" is a hard thing to measure. As much as it pains me, here's an omission that hasn't been mentioned yet: Kiss, yes, Kiss. Admittedly Kiss is among the worst bands ever assembled (imo, of course), but did they or did they not influence an entire generation of spandex clad, makeup wearing glam rock? Despite the ridiculous nature of some of that genre, influence is influence.

Thank you, Ursus. This is one I won't be even bothering with.... Or are you joking? I'm afraid that this book is already on my shelf waiting for my attention. Even if I disagree with the notion from the very onset, I hope at least that the theory is well supported.

He's here.

The list is endless, Numa. It would depend whether you want primary sources or modern works. Either way, it is still an endless list. Also, do you want a general overview, or more in-depth treatments? Just as quick and unscientific proof of what Augusta is suggesting, check out this simple search on "Roman Republic" in the books section of Amazon..

Toledo would be great for those of us in Ohio/Michigan and even western PA, but its a bit of a stretch for the east coasters.

The anthologies are bad. They should've limited the releases per decade to new music from that decade.

I believe the season 2 premiere is January 7 on HBO. I'm not sure when BBC will be starting again.

I'm sure Cato will contend with you on some of your points, but I will respectfully point out that Caesar's civil war hardly ended them, but led to a struggle for power that lasted over a decade. It was after the wars between Octavian, Brutus, Cassius, Sextus Pompey, Lepidus, Antony and Cleopatra, that there was civil peace until AD 69 (though there were revolts that were suppressed).