GhostOfClayton

I'm very much rooted in the "Star Trek" end of that timespan so, as you've pointed out, my generation very much saw the pushing of the frontiers into space as a sign of mankind advancing and maturing as a species. I'm also in possession of a very adventurous nature, so it's hard for me not to see this (along with the grounding of Concorde and resultant end to supersonic passenger travel) as indications of stagnation. However, this is a very Americano/Euro/Western-o centric view. The Russians and Chinese are proving that the space race was much more of a tortoise & hare thing and, taking up the mantle that was dropped by the Americans, are continuing to push the envelope space-wise . . . and India is looking promising. Maybe this is the first sign that mankind as a whole is not stagnating after all. It's just that some lights are fading, just as other lights are starting to burn more brightly. We as enthiasts of the Roman Empire should know all about that. As a footnote, it's great that Mr Branson et al are keeping the light burning for the western hemisphere, but probably wouldn't be saying the same if that role was being undertaken by Rupert or James Murdoch. The thought sends shivers down my spine.

. . . . not on an island, then?

. . . and I like the ironic way you used 'Berliner' in the title of this thread!

Yep - can't remember her name, though. Probably another reason this character was left out was the ambiguous nature of Marcus Aquila's relationship with her. She was too young to be a 'love interest' (in a children's book and Hollywood film, if not in real-life Roman Britain), though their friendship seemed more than just that. My view only.

Please let me know how you get on, Bryaxis. I realised I haven't worked in a German speaking country since Vienna in 2008, and my German is getting very rusty, so I put my name down for Berlin in December. It's likely to go to a guide who has done it before, but I'd be interested in your experiences in case I'm chosen.

The movie removed at least one key character from the book, but in fairness had she been left in, they would have needed to add at least another hour. The Seal People didn't exist as such in the book. The pair visited a number of tribes whilst North of the wall. Again, this was reduced to the one by necesity of time. Though why there seems to be this need for Hollywood to invent iron age tribes when there exists evidence for plenty of real ones to choose from!?! Anyone else think of any more glaring omissions?

Hmm tough one. Surely it's to the east of a line between the Bosphourous and the Nile Delta. (A sort of curvey line taking in Asia.)

Correct on both counts, Macerinus. You get today's 'Minster Spotter' badge.

I'm on fire! Try this one: . . . and for a bonus point, what's the building in the background?

But if I stop worrying about, I can't blog about it!

Yep . . . you were quite bold to say it was an easy one. Looks quite 2nd Century. Reminds me a little bit of Vibia Sabina, consort to the Emperor Hadrian.

Hi Maladict. It really depends what you want to get out of your trip. If (as I suspect is the case) you are in it for the antiquity and not the walking, then the suggestions above are great. To boil them down depends very much (as Corax suggests) on whether or not you have a car. If you don't, the following are must see: Day 1 - using the Metro Arbeia Segedunum Day 2 - Using the AD122 bus Chesters (not forgetting Chesters Bridge, and Brunton Turret if time permits) Corbridge Roman Site Day 3 Procolitia Vindolanda Housesteads Day 4 Walk from Housesteads to the Roman Army Museum. 12 tough miles, but this is the best stretch of the wall, where you'll find the best preserved structures, and classic photo opportunities. If you had a car, you could add the Benwell sites, maybe Heddon-on-the-Wall, Planetrees (if you can park), and maybe even squeeze in some of the stuff around Birdoswald (the good stuff starts at Poltross Burn Milecastle (MC48) and ends at Hare Hill (tallest extant stretch of the curtain wall). It includes Pike Hill Signal Tower, and some turf wall bits. If you're in it for the walking: Day 1 - Planetrees to Housesteads Day 2 - Housesteads to Roman Army Museum Day 3 - Roman Army Museum to Banks/Hare Hill This will cover the best walking stretch, leaving day 4 to do Segedunum & Arbeia or Corbridge & Vindolanda. Don't write off Carlisle - Tullie House Museum is superb! I don't want to advertise on here, but if you are a walker the company I guide for may interest you. PM me, and I'll let you know details of their Hadrian's Wall tour.

You can't help looking at pictorial representations of the Godess Victory/Victoria, and thinking she's an angel. Did the one evolve from the other?

Janus. The two faces, one looking forward on the new year, and one reflecting on the old. We could all do more of that.

Hmm . . . the next question is "have I still got it?". I'll have a look tonight and PM you if I have.

I did see that (though, to be unnecessarily pedantic, it's called 'Scrapheap Challenge' in the UK and 'Junkyard Wars' in His Majesty's Former Colonies In The West). As I remember, the trebuchet was so powerful that it destroyed it's own (not insignificant) metal frame. . . . . and it was on Channel 4.

That WAS an unwatchable series. Jones' main reason for emerging from obscurity was by making a career out of knee-jerk irreverence in Monty Python. Wikipedia says he currently passes his time by demonizing in print the efforts to contain terror. I wonder if he was the "python" who John Cleese suggested as having had a distrustful childhood making him paranoid about any authority. He had a funny way of describing this, but only would criticize in name the "python" who died. About the same year, UC Berkeley held a class which is now downloadable that demonized the Romans in the same revisionist way, even within their borders. Also then, another "python" Micheal Palin did some present day travel documentaries pushing the victimology angle. Perhaps we'll find out more when this hits our screens in Autumn. OK, so that was an excuse to warn you all it was on its way.

I'm loving the Mambo#5 video, Klingan. Had this lady been the 13-year-old GhostOfClayton's history teacher, I'd be telling you lot all about Ancient Rome by now, rather than the other way round.

CE is a little too academic for my tastes. As Ursus says - appropriate for this forum or perhaps non-fiction, but AD has a much more comfortable feel for your context. It's like the whole 'UT' argument. Don't know what I mean by UT? If I called it GMT, I bet you would know straight away.

He has the look of Marcus Aurelius about him.

Wish I'd read this at the time of going to press - I would've gone for the tour on Sunday.

I'm not a racist, but . . . I am totally hung up with the thought that someone might think I am. It's almost like a mini-obsession. It would be the worst thing in my little world if anyone else (especially someone belonging to an ethnic minority) got an impression that I might be. And I think the majority of white English folk are just the same as me. It would be all well and good if this hang up didn't affect our behaviour, but it does. There's a bit of an urban legend that someone went into Starbucks (or similar) and was served by a black Barista. "Erm . . can I order a . . . white coffee . . but without milk?" the customer asked. "That would be a black coffee, then?", the Barista replied. This may or may not be true, but I suspect any English person would recognise the emotion going on in the customer. We are all (and by 'all', I mean 'me') so screwed up by Racism-guilt that there's a slight quickening of the pulse just when using the word 'black'. And when using the word 'black' to describe someone's ethnic origin, it's often spoken slightly under our breath with a little look round to see if there are any black people within earshot that will hear us utter this most heinous of racial slurs. The other, and more terrible thing I find myself doing in my desperation, is over compensating for whatever racist tendencies I fear live deep within my psyche. I'm overly friendly to the, regrettably few, blacks and Asians I come across in my daily life. Although this is done with the best of intentions, I'm hung up about it being a patronising attitude, and loath myself for it. I can�t win! So, what evidence do I have for projecting my own psychological dysfunction onto the majority of my own particular ethnic group (white and English)? It's this: I visited New York recently (did I mention that before?), and witnessed a whole different racial dynamic. The English, it seems to me, are so screwed up about racism, that they worry that even acknowledging racial differences may single them out as being racist. Their ideal is not to even see someone's colour, but to just see the person. Sounds good. Sounds like a world that John Lennon would have loved to live in. However, in New York, and especially in Harlem, I witnessed ethnic differences not only being openly acknowledged, but respected and even celebrated. I even saw black people being called black people . . . to their faces, and not even minding! The fact that I felt this to be worthy of comment shows just how screwed up I/we are. Take the Schomburg Centre in Harlem. This is an institution dedicated to research into black culture. It's not a museum, but a dynamic, working institution, vibrant and alive (and a must-visit if you find yourself in the area). It genuinely made me a little bit jealous of those who had this wonderful, proud heritage compared to my seemingly bland and banal heritage (yes, that is up for argument, but at that moment, in that building, that's how it seemed to me). Anyway, I think such an institute would not be possible in England, and that is truly our loss. I believe the New York way is right, and the John Lennon way is wrong. What do you think? After word: Of course the above is slightly idealised. A minority of white English are overtly racist, and a larger minority are casually racist because their peers are also casually racist, (and they're too ignorant to know any better). And I'm sure that a native New Yorker may raise their eyebrows at my description of racial harmony and think, "that bloke's a pillock! What does he know?" I readily accept that the blog uses sweeping generalisation to describe a complex and emotive subject. Hopefully readers will recognise that this is just to simplify the point, but I do apologise profusely . . . after all, I don't want to come across as some sort of racist!

The trouble with the past is that there's a hell of a lot of it. Anyone who tries to interpret history by digging up negligible quantititles of it is either very naive, or in need of a grant for their next dig.

IMDB seems to suggest a 2013 release date.

This somewhat reflects the Norman invasion, and to a degree they're still apparent as a class apart in British society to this day. Also, I once watched a documentary that suggested there was far less Viking DNA in the modern northern Brit than may have been thought . . . and we all know how the Roman elite behaved in that respect. From this, it would seem that "elite transfer" is typical behaviour, and it's entirely possible that the same happened with the Saxons. However, there is documentary evidence of marriages (maybe of convenience) between Norman Lords and Saxon Countesses long after 1066.