Maty

Would these be some of the excavations at Cirta, then?

Just someone's basement to go on, but I'll guess south-western Med based on my shaky knowledge of Roman brickwork - 1st century Gades perhaps?

er .. Lucius Brutus?

Returning to the original point of why a flanking movement through the woods was not attempted, I'd say the easy answer is that is was not possible. Apart from the fact that the ground was broken in any case (access to the battlefield was through 'a defile'), those accustomed to managed British woodlands might find it difficult to get to grips with the sheer impenetrability of primaeval forest. In mixed deciduous forest, the amount of undergrowth, fallen logs and brambles makes it a machete job for a small party to move slowly forward. It would take weeks to move even a couple of thousand men across such terrain, even following meandering deer pathways etc. Those who emerged would not be in any sort of order, making them easy pickings for any reception committee, and as it is impossible to move silently through such terrain, there would indeed be a reception committee. I remember a few years back, a British army unit in the tropics on exercises wandered into a valley and could not get out. They were only a dozen or so men, yet they nearly starved to death. Thick forest and broken terrain will block an army even more effectively than a moat.

This topic perhaps? At a guess, I'd say that this looks like the young Antonia Augusta.

For research purposes, I don't care if I'm seeing the original or a 100% faithful replica. In fact with things like Trajans column copies are much better, because you can examine the sculpture in detail. Also, with the advent of 3d 'printing' it won't be long before some sculptures can be very faithfully and cheaply replicated. It's the same people in favour of keeping stuff in British museums who tend to howl blue murder if any part of Britain's cultural heritage is sold off to the Americans. That's the argument for keeping copies and sending back the originals. On the other hand, nothing has the emotional impact of something that has simply survived for so long, and actually been present for history we can only speculate about. And helping artefacts survive is what western museums do best. The Elgin marbles would not be in their present (already damaged) condition if they had been left in situ - they almost certainly would be eroded by pollution or further damaged. (This is probably also an argument for taking Pompeii away from the Italians.) Finally, things like thermo-luminescence, multi-spectrum light analysis and other techniques for questioning ancient artefacts are best done in controlled conditions in western museums. And wouldn't it be nice if some of those artefacts in the Cairo museum had been evacuated in time? (I'm still steaming about that vandalism!)

I'll look forward to reading this book when it comes out. Make sure you announce the launch to all UNRV members! PS I guess 'Tartan Sonja' is out of the question?

Andraste was a Celtic war-goddess, so I doubt that Boudicca would choose that name for her daughter. As far as I know the Celts, like the Romans, did not normally name their kids after gods. (Though oddly enough both gladiators and prostitutes sometimes used divine pseudonyms.) Not only do we not know the names of Boudicca's daughters, but the name Boudicca itself might mean something like 'priestess of the goddess' and not be the lady's name but her job description.

If this is for Trotsky. let us remember the famous words of his housekeeper when the assassin arrived Domine, quod est homo cerebrum suum volat excavare. (Sir, a man is here. He wants to pick your brain.) With grovelling apologies. M

In that case (and I'll await correction from someone who knows what he is talking about) I'd assume a Roman sarcophagus and go further in thinking that the gent on the right is the deceased. If there is another panel showing a similar figure centre stage then it's almost certain. You'll note that this guy is wearing a toga (rather similar in style to that of Tiberius on the Ara Pacis) which makes him rather out of place in a mythological Greek scene. There's a neat and ordinarily impractical combination of toga - which Romans were buried in - and travelling boots! He has his head covered, which is the proper response of a togate Roman to the presence of the divine,and rather interestingly, a beard, which suggests that we are looking at something late second century AD?

Read with particular care the bit that tells how the historian Polybios ended up in Rome ... Those 'witch-hunted' were opposition to a Roman puppet government in Greece rather than threats to Rome itself. In fact many of those subsequently exiled were sent to Italy.

Apart from Demeter, lady of the golden sword and glorious fruits, she [Persephone] was playing with the deep-bosomed daughters of Okeanos and gathering flowers over a soft meadow, roses and crocuses and beautiful violets, irises also and hyacinths and the narcissus ...but the wide-pathed earth yawned there in the plain of Nysa, and the lord of many, with his immortal horses sprang out upon her; [Hades]the Son of Kronos ... And [Demeter] the daughter of rich-haired Rheia answered Hekate not, but sped swiftly with her, holding flaming torches in her hands. Homeric Hymn 2 to Demeter In front of the chariot is certainly Hermes Psychopompus, who leads souls into the underworld. The identity of the bearded bloke on the far right is something of a mystery. Is this bas-relief from a tomb?

Kindle is software rather than hardware. You can get a dedicated Kindle reader from Amazon, but I use kindle on my iPad, where I get the advantages of long battery life and backlighting and colour. I started using it for ancient texts (easily searchable, makes indexes redundant, and you can scribble notes all over it) then I wanted to read a particular book on impulse and saw it was available as an ebook. I downloaded it and was reading moments later. The eBook selection on Amazon may not be comprehensive, but its much bigger than any bookshops in town. The only downside is that I got my wife an eBook for Christmas, and ever since I've had to fight her for the iPad. She's getting her own on Valentine's day.

I've seen a coin of Mithridates that was rather crudely converted into a necklace - and that in ancient times. But I have to agree that there's something about a coin that really brings ancient history home. I remember as an undergraduate we were in a class discussing the Roman corn subsidy to the citizens. The tutor let us pass around a contemporary coin showing a grain of corn and stamped 'per frumentum' - a coin designed to be spent on exactly what we were talking about, and handled by Romans for whom this was a contemporary issue. It made the topic seem very real. Re Fortuna - thanks for the great coverage of the topic. You have covered Fortuna as Tyche, but to the Romans she also included Tyche's grimmer counterpart Nemises. Or perhaps this would be a whole new topic?

Caesar had to live down the nickname 'Queen of Bithynia' after his alleged antics with Nicomedes. He also pointed out that history recorded some powerful queens (of the Female Royal variety)- Semiaramis of Babylon being one example. As has been commented above, who did what to whom was almost as important as gender in Roman perceptions of sex, and being on the receiving end was generally considered unmanly. Caesar might have had a youthful fling, but after that he appears to have focussed on the ladies, and the more aristocratic the better. The notches on his bedpost included at least two queens (FRv). Going back to tagline on the original post - 'aut Caesar aut nihil' indeed. Sempronia tertia might have agreed.

In my experience (which is somewhat more extensive that I might wish) viewing violence is very different from being an active participant. As a general rule, when dishing out serious amounts of GBH to others, there is generally a severe risk of getting the same in return. A mixture of adrenaline and acute concentration can make you unaware of issues which cause bystanders serious concern. You are genuinely too excited and busy to contemplate injury. Likewise, when you are in a situation where you are a spectator and real nastiness has happened or is happening, it can seem more unreal than something on the TV. Therefore I'd agree there is a point to Dr Gerber's thesis. Theatrical violence allows you to view bloodshed more vividly than the real thing, and allows the spectator to imagine this violence happening to him in a manner that is very different but in some ways even scarier than the reality.

For what it's worth, here's a description of one of the naves onerariae written in AD 200. This is the Isis, blown into the Pireaus by a storm. "What a size that ship was! 180 feet long, the man said, and something over a quarter of that in width; and from deck to keel, the maximum depth, through the hold, 44 feet. And then the height of the mast, with its huge yard; and what a forestay it takes to hold it! And the lofty stern with its gradual curve, and its gilded beak, balanced at the other end by the long rising sweep of the prow, and the figures of her name-goddess, Isis, on either side. As to the other ornamental details, the paintings and the scarlet topsail, I was more struck by the anchors, and the capstans and windlasses, and the stern cabins. The crew was like a small army. And they were saying she carried as much corn as would feed every soul in Attica for a year. And all depends for its safety on one little old lump of a man, who controls that great rudder with a mere broomstick of a tiller! He was pointed out to me; Heron was his name, I think; a woolly-headed fellow, half-bald." Samippus in Lucian's the Ship 5 Some caution is required because Lucian might have come over all literary instead of reporting fact, and secondly, the translation I have given is an unreliable one - you'll need someone better than I to look at the original. But it might repay investigation.

If we go by normal Roman nomenclature, and the Romans themselves sometimes did not, the name would suggest that this particular scumbag was originally of the Decius clan, and was adopted by one Catus. The '-anus' suffix (particularly appropriate here) is usually used by an adoptee to show his original gens. A better known example from a previous generation would be Scipio Aemilianus.

I do Saturnalia, Christmas, the Druidic winter solstice and Brumalia. The latter may be particularly relevant to UNRV forum members, as apparently it's a Graeco-Roman festival which ends on 25th December and - it's sacred to Bacchus. Let the revels begin!

I can't help directly, but take a look at Faulkner's 'Empire of the Eagles' - he has pretty much the same views (so did Tiberius Gracchus, come to that), so you may well find a reference there. Maty (In blood and foam at Trafalgar And on Alberra plains We did and died like lions To keep ourselves in chains G.K. Chesterton Sorry, I couldn't resist!)

Of course, as fugitives from the law, the risk in taking a ship is that no-one is going to know or care if the captain and crew take your money and quietly drop you overboard a few stades out. Careful negotiation will be required ...!

There were a few pointers one could get from a toga - e.g. Black togas meant mourning, white togas meant candidates (in fact that's where the word comes from; the toga candida), a broad purple stripe meant a senator, a narrow stripe an equestrian. Also, there are indications that in times of military emergency, togas were not worn in public life. And of course only Roman citizens could wear togas A purple cloak meant a conquering general (an imperator) which probably why Caligula took exception to someone else wearing one in his presence. I recall (I think from Livy) that it was mooted that slaves should have to wear distinctive dress, but this was voted down as it was considered dangerous for slaves to know how numerous they were.

Beneath the mess of misrepresentation and (I suspect) deliberate distortion of facts, there are a few points which have been missed by both sides but which are worth consideration. 1. The American Republic was consciously modelled on the Roman Republic (for which reason Plutarch has been called one of the most influential writers in American history). It would be unsurprising if similar structures did not have similar flaws. 2. A prominent feature of the Late Republic (and one of the reasons for its fall) was the capture of state offices by wealthy families. 'Those made consuls in their cradles' Cicero calls them. This is a reference to the gentes Cennedi, Clintonii and Buchi. 3. The army went from being the male voters (who were consequently resistant to coercion) to a professional body controlled directly or indirectly by the top families. 4. Overall, life in the first hundred years of the empire was immensely more prosperous, civilized and peaceful than life in the last hundred years of the republic. Personally, I don't think the USA is anywhere near a 'Rubicon moment'. Also, despite the above similarities there are so many differences between the USA and the Roman Republic that any direct comparison - let alone extrapolation - is facile and ludicrous. That's my two denarii ...

While I can appreciate what they are trying to do with the website, I find it clunky and frustrating. And sloooow. My preference is to have my own ap. crit. and the entire work in plain text. Then I can load it into my programs on my own computer and do what I want with it. I don't know of any way to download an entire text from Pursues, and often I know approximately where a section of text is, and have to go laboriously from page to page to find it rather than being able to quickly scan a larger chunk. Also, the best way to read an ancient text is 'Loeb style' so that one can refer to the original when you want to check the translation. This is easy to set up on my word processor, but difficult with the website. Overall, I only use Perseus when I have no other choice.

This seems to be the new style or writing history - fact and personal 'interpretation' mixed together in a highly readable, but potentially inaccurate manner. Rather like the old style of the Romans themselves, in fact. This is the first I've heard of the followers of Isis being involved. Why them? And why not, for example, the Bacchic cult? There's also a very credible theory doing the rounds that 'Christian' fanatics were indeed guilty. Arson was the terrorism of the day, and we have recently had experience of how far dogmatic fundamentalists are prepared to go in attacking the 'Great Satan' (yup, they pretty much called Rome that too). But if it's well argued, I might be persuaded that Isisites (is that right?) were the arsonists. But Nero a good emperor? No, no, and no again.