GhostOfClayton

Come the glorious day, Melvadius, there'll be free Battenberg for all UNRV members!

Well, there's nothing British about that sky, so we can rule Britannia out immediately. Is it the Northwestern edge of Pompeii, close to the tourist entrance?

Good morrow to thee, Blogees, and welcome one and all to the GhostOfClayton 'Increasing Less Frequent Than Twice-Fortnightly' blog. Comfortable? OK! Horizon BBC2's flagship science series 'Horizon' has been in top form of late, but the recent offering 'Science Under Attack' left me almost trembling with frustration. The aim of the programme was to highlight the current trend in society to (at best) mis-trust and (at worst) disbelieve and actively attempt to discredit the scientific majority view, and at the forefront of this seem to be the more right-wing newspapers, though they are by no means exclusive. The general tendency is for them to cherry-pick scientific data and news stories that meet their political agenda, rather than having their political agenda formed by peer-reviewed scientific study. A common tactic is to hint at some political hidden agenda among the scientific community, who are clearly plotting to invent conclusions in order to allow governments to exercise greater control over all our lives. On the whole, very, very few scientists (apart from the ones who are funded by corporations) have weird little political hidden agendas. Politicians, journalists and activists have those, so who are we going to choose to listen to? The majority of people will always listen to those opinions that reinforce their beliefs. It is very difficult for a human being to embrace a way of thinking that goes against what they have always (wanted to) believe. For example, many Americans choose to listen to their right wing media (e.g. Fox News) because they�re worried they may have to (say) use a smaller car if there is any truth to global warming. If the average man/woman in the street understands this concept, they tend not to alter their behaviour as a result, so the only conclusion is that they will never change. I like to think of UNRV people as cognoscenti (don�t look it up � if you have to look it up, you�re not one) and so should be able to grasp the concept. UNRV people don't, however, have the time to devote to collating all the peer-reviewed research, and reading/understanding it merely to form an opinion that drives our behaviours. The science involved is too complex. Therefore we have to accept that our opinions must be guided by others. We have the choice whether that be the majority view of the scientific community, or the media. I know whose mast I shall be nailing my colours to. My ire was reserved most especially for the bloody stupid hack (pardon my French) that uncovered so-called 'Climategate'. In my moment of maximum ire, I told Mrs OfClayton that if he were to be taken out and shot, I would be buying cakes! I quickly realised that this was just the sort of comment that you might hear on Fox News. So, as an egalitarian, I have reluctantly tempered my views towards him very slightly.

Movies: The upcoming - The Eagle (of the Ninth) (2011) The disappointing - King Arthur (2004) TV Series: The TV Mini series of the above - The Eagle of the Ninth (1977) The outstanding - Chelmsford 123 (1980ish) . . . . . Mungo: They call me Mungo the Contradictory. Roman: Do they? Mungo: No.

Good find, Gilius. Wikipedia references "Rochester, The evolution of the City. Ronald Marsh. 1974 p&p Medway Borough Council". You'd think that, of all the Roman Roads in Britannia, Watling Street would be one of the earliest to be established. Its first main river crossing would be at Rochester, and Aulus Plautius would (as suggested on Wikipedia) have wanted to defend this crossing. Typically, a small wooden fort would be established. If this was the case, it would be a natural choice for a later oppidum covering the region, and so would naturally have developed into a Romano-British settlement. 190 AD seems quite late for the first fortifications to appear, especially given the AD61 Iceni revolt.

Agreed.

Sorry, when I said, "here's a website about the festival in general," what I meant to say was, "here's a website about the festival in general."

This is just a placeholder to say that I've started a new thread for UK Meet 2011.

UK Meet 2010 never really got off the ground, so may I make the following suggestion for 2011: The annual York Roman Festival will be held Spring Bank Holiday weekend (28th and 29th May). Myself and Mrs OfClayton will certainly be going along for a looksee at what's on offer, so if anyone else would like to come along and join in the fun, we'd love to give you the opportunity of buying us a drink! York is fairly central, and easily accessible - not too far off the A1(M) for motorists, and on the East Coast Main Line for rail users. If our friends from overseas would like to come along, York is very easy to get to from Hull (excellent ferry from Rotterdam or Zeebrugge), and also from Leeds/Bradford airport. Doncaster Robin Hood Airport is also not too bad for York. Being a major tourist city, accommodation is plentiful, though with it being a Bank Holiday, early booking is advised. It

Then the prize is yours, Melvadius - I'll PM you when I can think of what it is. In the mean time, to get this thread moving again, and with Marcus Silanus' permission, I think it's only proper for you to have the honour of providing the next image.

Interesting topic - you have whetted my appetite to know more. In the first 2 photos, presumably the lower (tall) layer of facing stones is relatively modern, and can be ignored for our puproses. There are loads of example of medieval stonework being laid ontop of Roman Stonework - the Multiangular Tower in York is one example, and there's a lighthouse down on the Saxon Shore somewhere (help me out, somebody - my memory has failed me). It's difficult to confirm without a closer examination, but the layer above the modern layer is very likely to be Roman. The third photo looks just like many remaining chunks of Roman wall core. Again, very likely, but a good look at how any remaining facing stones were dressed would help. Also, looking at the map, the NW is the part that looks more classically Roman. The 4th photo (if you ignore the layer at the bottom right which looks like a later addition to help with retention of a changing ground level) is classic Roman. Very likely! There's nothing in the last photo that leads me to any real Roman influence. If I really squint, I could talk myself into thinking there's a broder piece of Roman wall core between the two rose beds, onto which a slightly narrower wall has been built. The map is quite telling. The NW corner looks pretty Roman, as does the street layout of High Street and Northgate. Those factors should give you the approximate size of what was probably the original fort that may have become the town. There's usually a book written by a local historian, if you can track it down.

One thing to consider: It's tempting to think that freed slaves (on the whole) did quite well for themselves - there's plenty of evidence of freed slaves gaining wealth and gameful employment. They seem on the face of it to be hard working types with the same sort of go=getting spirit you see in the poor unfortunates that find themselves being 'fired' by Lord Sugar / Donald Trump. However, the ones who fail miserably in their new lives wouldn't leave a record behind, so it's hard to say what the spread was on the falure - success spectrum.

Thanks for that. I've never been to Rome, but am hoping to get there some time in the next few years. It'll be worth remebering this is here.

On reflection, you're clearly a man of great integrity, Melvadius, so if you tell me you would've known in advance of seeing it on the telly, I shall believe you, and the prize will be yours. I can't say fairer than that.

If Marcus doesn't reply (he hasn't posted since February 2010), there's still my competition over on this thread, with a prize to the winner. Only one rule - you're not allowed to enter if you're Melvadius. This isn't a personal prejudice I have against him, I just happen to know he saw the programme! (sorry Melvadius!).

Did anyone watch this on Channel 4 last night? Very entertaining. The premise is that English Heritage employed 6 builders to build a Roman villa using only tools, materials and techniques available at the time. Not really specifically an educational programme (though there was much to be learned), it mixed a light and amusing style with a genuine exercise to further understand Roman building work. Star of the show: The Geordie plumber who seemed to have a T Shirt with a different misogentistic motto each time you saw him. Best bit: The Professor of History, (tasked with overseeing the historical accuracy of the job) giving the builders a real tongue-lashing for daring to bring wheelbarrows onto site. The one you feel most sorry for: The Cockney labourer who was given all the unskilled jobs, and as a result seemed to pick up new injuries on an almost daily basis. . . . and I bet any Safety Inspector watching found it difficult not to vocalise strongly the lack of PPE being used at times.

'Superior' means closer to Rome, and 'Inferior', further away. Simple as that!

I like it! I'm not sure Mrs OfClayton would share our enthusiasm for the piece, though.

Good point, Maty. I know that I Kindle (what do you know! It can be used as a verb as well) on my iPod Touch as well as the Kindle reader, and can segue seamlessly between the two. I am quite jealous of a household that has just one iPad, let alone two. I'm yet to even see one in the flesh.

I work for a company that sends thousands of clients on thousands of flights every year, and none of those flights have been directly affected by terrorism, (other than having to drink all their water before going through to the departure lounge). Hawaii sounds really nice, but my advice (and that of anyone else on this forum, I'm sure) is "go for it!"

I'm intrigued as to why the world needs to be any safer to get to Rome. Do you know something I don't? Should I be worried? Tell all!

Mary Beard (a very well respected historian - by me, at least) makes some very convincing points.

That's the one, Crispina.

Can I recomend 'Imperium' by Robert Harris. He describes the 'goings-on' 'at a typical criminal trial of that period in some detail. Its sequel, 'Lustrum' does the same.