Maty

Did Sir Ronald publish any books on this topic? His stuff is really hard to find here in New Zealand. I'm hoping that I can find some on the net. The Roman Revolution contains a few prosopographical analyses, but his serious prosopographical work was published in scholarly journals. Thankyou, Marcus Porcius. If you are interested in Syme's prosopography (also known as 'stalking ancient Romans'). Take a look at his book 'The Augustan Aristocracy' (Clarendon 1989). This deals with the families of the period in exhaustive - possibly even mind-numbing - detail, and explains clearly who was related/descended from whom and to what degree. Once you get to know the people involved, this book helps the late Republic and early empire make sense. I wouldn't read something like Gruen's 'Last Generation' without it by my elbow.

"I frequently ask my daughter which would she prefer: Visiting her father's Ancient Roman ancestors, relaxing in their heated baths, and enjoying sumptuous meals...or visiting her mother's ancient ancestors who slept in mud huts, made human sacrifices, and put rancid butter in their hair." If you'd asked me at say, age 12, I'd have taken the ancient Brit option every time.

Toilet paper. Paper (well, papyrus)was rare and very expensive. That a book might cost less than a good horse would have impressed a Roman, but that paper could be so cheap that you could ...well, you get the picture!

I think the consensus is that Marius certainly did not help. Two things to consider. The army always used to choose the leaders of Rome,in that the comitia centuriata was essentially the Roman army in voting order. In the first century BC, thanks in part to the Marian reforms, the Roman electorate and the Roman army were for the first time not one and the same. This did not stop the army from picking Rome's leaders, it just made the process a great deal messier. Secondly, the real damage done by Marius was not his reforms, but his feud with Sulla. The last generation of the Roman Republic were collectively traumatized by proscriptions. Seeing the heads of their fathers and uncles on poles beside the rostra probably engendered a certain contempt for the constitutional process.

Interesting little compound gadget ... aqueducts, roads, law codes, and now this. http://www.reghardware.com/2010/11/08/roman_multi_tool_spied_on_web/

Mountain tops were the usual sacrificial places for Persian religion, so you might do better looking up the significance of the mountain in Zoroastrianism rather than in classical myth. Mithridates VI, for instance, does a huge mountaintop sacrifice after the second mithridatic war. This mountain is the highest in that part of Anatolia (maybe in Anatolia altogether). There's a reference in Strabo, (though he calls it Mt Agaios, so when you search look for both spellings). It's 'the highest of mountains whose peak is constantly covered with snow ...given good visibility, anyone who climbs this mountain - and not many do- are supposed to see both seas, the Pontus and the Issikos'. There's a coin of Trajan which depicts the thing. You might also like to note that the nearest town, Eusebeia, was a cult centre both in Hellenistic times and in the Christian era (St Basil). Also, according to my guide book on Asia Minor (I've done a lot of military research on the region), the mountain is a strato-volcano which blew its lid in the third century, which probably led to it being regarded with a certain amount of respect.

Of course, while Ireland is an undoubtedly lovely place, the Romans may not have wanted it. I suspect that 'because it's there' was not sufficient reason by the Agricola's time. According to Tacitus, the Romans were already having buyer's remorse about Britain. The idea of tying down, hmm, say another two legions to go with the three already in Britain would be an expensive investment for what appeared to be another boggy wasteland filled with uncivilized hillbillies. It might make a good essay question for an undergrad class - 'Can you justify Agricola conquering Ireland in terms of a) Trade b)Resources c)Strategic considerations? What does your answer tell you about imperial frontier policy in the first century AD?'

If it's Wheelock, the book is a standard textbook. Just dump the whole sentence into Google, and an English translation will pop up. Here's the rest of the exercise with answers below each sentence. http://lindenbranch....s/archives/4433 Remember also that Google does a moderately bad job of turning Latin into English and vice versa. But its a helpful guide. Running this sentence through their translator gives 'They could not, therefore, you about the penalties of your friends yesterday of admonition.' Since the verb is missing between 'therefore' and 'you', and 'of admonition' is hanging around doing nothing at the end of the sentence, its easy enough to correct where G. went wrong. Then change 'of' to 'to' and Robertus patruo tuus est.

You mean that the money I borrowed will have to be repaid in 2013 after all? Darn it, the movie was so convincing that I'd invested it all in Tibetan real estate.

For those who don't know this fascinating topic, this article is a good introduction, and gives aficionados an update on the state of play http://news.discovery.com/archaeology/ancient-roman-map-puzzle-may-get-new-pieces.html

"The founding of Rome has been pinpointed to the year 753." (From the original quote) If anyone has really proven the above statement, then we can forget the German cities. This a much bigger story. Sadly, I suspect journalistic rhetoric.

Are you writing about Sertorius? Yup - I'm doing his battles for in 2000 words for a joint project on ancient battles. I may expand this into a book if I can find an interested publisher. Going back to maps - I've found that loading some of the really large scale maps of the ancient world onto an iPad gives at least one practical use for the thing. With Google earth on the computer screen and the map on the iPad, I can easily resize and scroll my way across the landscape. Nearest thing to fighting the campaign myself!

The Romans used elephants during the Second and Third Macedonian wars. They were not only at Cynoscephalae, as mentioned above,they also did rather well at Pydna. (Where the Macedonians experimented with an anti-elephant corps of men with spiky armour, apparently in the hope the elephants wold find it tough to tread on them.) However if you read the accounts of Marcus Philippus getting the elephants into Macedonia in the first place you can see that there were perhaps hardly worth the trouble. They needed special ramps to get them down some slopes and slid down others on their backsides. I guess that in the end the Romans figured out that while elephants were useful on the battlefield, you got more bang for the buck (or more weaponry for the wheat bushel?) with an extra cohort or ala of cavalry

This is a fascinating plant - I looked at it a while back, but must admit, it never occurred to me that it might be a fantasy. It's a salutary reminder that anything from ancient history needs sceptical examination. That said, the two main points made here against it being real are exclusivity of habitat, and contraceptive qualities. These should not betaken as de facto proof of non-existence. Artemesium would also have been assumed as having mythical anti-malarial properties if these were not real and measurable by modern science. Likewise opium as a pain-killer (which the Romans also knew and used.) We know that some plants do contain chemicals which affect the female reproductive system. There is for example that legendary symbol of fertility, the pomegranate, which actually contains natural esterone, which is one of the family of estrogens also manufactured by the female body. In fact there is an entire branch of plants which produce estrogen-related steroids (look up Phytoestrogens). Some of these mimic estrogen, and others - significantly- are antigenic to it. Therefore the existence of a plant which can significantly but temporarily interfere with the reproductive chemistry of a fertile female is not scientifically improbable. In terms of rarity, even in the modern world there are plants which obstinately refuse to grow outside their native habitat. The round-leaf Birch(Betula uber) refuses to grow anywhere but along a small river in Virginia, and Barker's Larkspur defied all attempts to grow it outside a limited habitat in California and is now extinct. We don't need to blame the Romans for silphium becoming extinct - the Sahara desert grew from almost nothing to its present size in the last 10,000 years and is still expanding. Climate change is not an exclusively modern phenomenon. However, agricultural mismanagement might have helped this fascinating plant to become extinct - if indeed it did exist. A final thought. I can't think of any reason for limiting a mythical plant to one geographical area. Like unicorns or griffins anyone can claim to have once had them - ut only one place ever claimed to have grown silphium.

Actually I doubt that the Galatians they were Hellenized to any great degree. Anatolia is divided by a series of mountain ranges and valleys which managed to keep many cultures quite distinct. (And does today - ask any Kurd). Pontus alone had dozens of distinct languages. The Galatians settled on the bleak deserty interior plateau, and certainly in the early first century BC still had pretty much retained most of their original language and culture. Given their isolation and the fact that other than Ancyra there was not much urbanization, I'd be surprised if things had changed dramatically by the time of St Paul. (A comment on the original post -Galatia was not entirely Phrygia and vice versa. Some of old Phrygia was in Pergamum and Pontus, and parts of South-east Galatia were never Phrygian.)

With sacrificial dogs, the article doesn't mention it, but it is worth noting that Roman farmers used to sacrifice a rust-coloured dog to avert the wrath of Robiga, the deity which inflicted the ruinous crop disease still called 'grain rust' today

Useful - I was looking for something that would allow me to look at the towns where Sertorius campaigned in Spain in 75 Bc - so a very serendipitous posting!

Congrats on Stilicho, Ian and am looking forward to hearing more on Aetius (hint)

Under Vespasian I believe the two legions at Mainz (Mogontiacum)were XIV Gemina and I Adiutrix. The other details seem to have been comprehensively filled in!

Of course, the average Roman actually worked I to VII. (From around 7am to 2pm). The only people who actually started work at IX were prostitutes, who were sometimes called 'ninth-hour' girls because they were not allowed to practice before then. I have the book in question - I find it great to dip into for a quick read now and then. Perhaps it works better this way than as a cover-to-cover read?

Belated birthday wishes from me too - hope your summer has been going well! Maty

'Tis not the centurion's cold steel Rajput should worry about - isn't the centurion's main weapon the rest of his centuria?

Okay ... A good story, and relating well to what someone tangentially related to the assassination might have felt. Just two niggles Firstly, where does the name Sethra come from? Since a Roman female's name was the feminine of the gentilicum, this suggests that the father was called Sethrus. Which is not a Roman name. Secondly the funeral of Caesar probably took place on March 17 - several days after the ides, so you are running events into each other.

Incidentally, you can find Shuckburgh translations free on the net, which is another reason to get the Shakleton-Bailey. http://www.digitalbookindex.org/_search/se...cientlatina.asp